Actionability Assertions

Gene Condition (MONDO ID) OMIM ID Final Assertion
FH hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (0007888) 150800 Assertion Pending

Actionability Assertion Rationale

  • This topic was initially scored prior to development of the process for making actionability assertions. The Actionability Working Group decided to defer making an assertion until after the topic could be reviewed through the update process.

Actionability Scores

Outcome / Intervention Pair Severity Likelihood Effectiveness Nature of Intervention Total Score
Renal cancer / Surveillance 2 2C 2C 3 9CC
Advanced uterine pathology / Annual GYN exam 1 3C 2C 3 9CC
View scoring key
Domain of Actionability Scoring Metric State of the Knowledgebase
Severity: What is the nature of the threat to health to an individual? 3 = Sudden death as a reasonably possible outcome
2 = Reasonable possibility of death or major morbidity
1 = Modest morbidity
0 = Minimal or no morbidity
N/A
Likelihood: What is the chance that the outcome will occur? 3 = >40% chance
2 = 5%-39% chance
1 = 1%-4% chance
0 = <1% chance
A = Substantial evidence or evidence from a high tier (tier 1)
B = Moderate evidence or evidence from a moderate tier (tier 2)
C = Minimal evidence or evidence from a lower tier (tier 3 or 4)
D = Poor evidence or evidence not provided in the report
N = Evidence based on expert contributions (tier 5)
Effectiveness: What is the effectiveness of a specific intervention in preventing or diminishing the risk of harm? 3 = Highly effective
2 = Moderately effective
1 = Minimally effective
0 = Controversial or unknown effectiveness
IN = Ineffective/No interventiona
A = Substantial evidence or evidence from a high tier (tier 1)
B = Moderate evidence or evidence from a moderate tier (tier 2)
C = Minimal evidence or evidence from a lower tier (tier 3 or 4)
D = Poor evidence or evidence not provided in the report
N = Evidence based on expert contributions (tier 5)
Nature of intervention: How risky, medically burdensome, or intensive is the intervention? 3 = Low risk, or medically acceptable and low intensity
2 = Moderate risk, moderately acceptable or intensive
1 = Greater risk, less acceptable and substantial intensity
0 = High risk, poorly acceptable or intensive
N/A
a Do not score the remaining categories

Prevalence of the Genetic Condition

The prevalence of HLRCC is unknown. Over 300 families with HLRCC have been reported.
View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

Clinical Features (Signs / symptoms)

Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) is a hereditary cancer syndrome characterized by a predisposition to cutaneous and uterine leiomyomas and, in some families, to renal cell cancer. Benign cutaneous leiomyomas are common, present as multiple or single nodules that are skin colored to light brown, and are usually localized to the trunk and extremities but may also appear on the face. They are usually sensitive to touch and/or cold temperature and may be painful. Uterine Leiomyomas (fibroids) are associated with symptoms of pelvic pain and irregular or heavy menstrual bleeding. Renal tumors may present with back pain, hematuria, or may be asymptomatic. These tumors are usually unilateral and solitary; most are type 2 with a characteristic papillary architecture but other tumor types are also found.
View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252, Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer. Orphanet encyclopedia, ORPHA: 523.

Natural History (Important subgroups & survival / recovery)

The majority of individuals with HLRCC (76%) present with a single or multiple cutaneous leiomyomas. Cutaneous leiomyomas usually present at an average age of 25 (range 10 to 47 years), and tend to increase in size and number with age. Uterine leiomyomas have been reported in 77% of women with HLRCC and appear at an average age of 30 (range 18 to 52 years) with symptoms preceding discovery. Fibroids tend to be numerous and large with earlier onset, and may require intervention (hysterectomy or myomectomy) at a younger age than fibroids seen in the general population. The renal carcinomas associated with HLRCC behave aggressively and have a poor prognosis compared with other forms of hereditary RCC. Only a small proportion of individuals with HLRCC develop renal cell cancer (RCC) at a median age of detection of 44 years. In contrast to other hereditary renal cancer syndromes, renal cancers associated with HLRCC are more aggressive, often rapidly progressing to metastatic disease and death. In one study about 10-16% of those with HLRCC who presented with multiple cutaneous leiomyomas had renal tumors and nine of these 13 individuals died from metastatic disease within 5 years of diagnosis.Try this.
View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252, Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer. Orphanet encyclopedia, ORPHA: 523., Online Medelian Inheritance in Man. (2015) OMIM: 150800

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Mode of Inheritance

Autosomal Dominant

HLRCC is inherited in an autosomal dominant manner. Some have HLRCC as the result of de novo gene mutation.

Prevalence of Genetic Variants

Unknown
Genetic prevalence is unknown. FH is the only gene known to be associated with hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC), and 70% to 90% of individuals with clinically diagnosed HLRCC have identifiable sequence variants in FH. Deletions and duplications also account for an additional small proportion.
Tier 4 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

Penetrance (Includes any high-risk racial or ethnic subgroups)

>= 40 %
Based on the outcomes of cutaneous leiomyomas, uterine leiomyomas, or renal tumor, penetrance of HLRCC is considered to be very high.
Tier 4 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

A French National Cancer Institute study of 44 families with genetically-confirmed HLRCC identified cutaneous leiomyomas in 68% of 151 affected members; uterine leiomyomas in 82% of 93 female affected members; and renal tumors in 18% of 151 affected members.
Tier 3 View Citations

Gardie B, et al. (2011) PMID: 21398687, Online Medelian Inheritance in Man. (2015) OMIM: 150800

5-39 %
Renal cancer has low penetrance in HLRCC syndrome, with an estimated incidence from 2%-6% to 15%, and possibly as high as 32% of germline mutation affected families, depending upon selection bias and imaging utilized.
Tier 5 View Citations

Pfaffenroth EC, et al. (2008) PMID: 18476789

Relative Risk (Includes any high-risk racial or ethnic subgroups)

Unknown
Information on relative risk was not available.

Expressivity

Affected individuals may have multiple cutaneous leiomyomas, a single skin leiomyoma, or no cutaneous lesion; a single renal tumor or no renal tumors; and/or uterine fibroids. Disease severity shows significant intra- and interfamilial variation.
Tier 3 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Patient Management

To establish the extent of disease and management needs in an individual diagnosed with HLRCC, the following evaluations are recommended: detailed dermatologic examination for evaluation of extent of disease and lesions suspicious for cutaneous leiomyosarcoma to include biopsy for histologic confirmation; baseline pelvic examination, pelvic MRI and/or transvaginal pelvic ultrasound to screen for uterine fibroids; baseline renal ultrasound and MRI to screen for renal tumors (or abdominal CT scan with contrast if MRI contraindicated); consultation with a medical geneticist and/or genetic counselor.
Tier 4 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

Because of the aggressive nature of renal cancers associated with HLRCC excision of these malignancies requires earlier and more extensive surgery than other hereditary renal cancers. Total nephrectomy should be strongly considered in individuals with a detectable renal mass.
Tier 4 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252, Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer. Orphanet encyclopedia, ORPHA: 523.

Surveillance

There is no consensus on clinical surveillance; provisional recommendations state that individuals with a clinical diagnosis of HLRCC and those with heterozygous pathogenic FH variants and no clinical manifestations should undergo:

- full skin examination annually to every 2 years;

- annual gynecologic consultation;

- and yearly examination with abdominal MRI for those with normal baseline or followup abdominal MRI (or abdominal CT scan with contrast if MRI contraindicated).

Suspicious lesions detected at a previous examination should be followed with a CT scan with and without contrast (with or without the addition of renal ultrasound or PET-CT).
Tier 4 View Citations

M Pithukpakorn, et al. (2006) NCBI: NBK1252

Annual pelvic examination of patients 21 years of age or older is recommended for all women, based on expert opinion.
Tier 5 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.acog.org.

Circumstances to Avoid

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Nature of Intervention

Surveillance is noninvasive. Abdominal CT scan may involve exposure to contrast material.
Context: Adult

Chance to Escape Clinical Detection

In one study, 71% of 24 nonprobands (relatives) with skin leiomyomas had not previously presented for medical attention. No patient who had presented with skin leiomyomas had been offered screening for uterine fibroids. Fibroids were rarely recognized as cases of HLRCC.
Context: Adult
Tier 5 View Citations

Alam NA, et al. (2005) PMID: 15724016

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.
Gene Condition Associations
OMIM Identifier Primary MONDO Identifier Additional MONDO Identifiers
FH 150800 0007888

References List

Alam NA, Barclay E, Rowan AJ, Tyrer JP, Calonje E, Manek S, Kelsell D, Leigh I, Olpin S, Tomlinson IP. (2005) Clinical features of multiple cutaneous and uterine leiomyomatosis: an underdiagnosed tumor syndrome. Archives of dermatology. 141(2):199-206.

Gardie B, Remenieras A, Kattygnarath D, Bombled J, Lefevre S, Perrier-Trudova V, Rustin P, Barrois M, Slama A, Avril MF, Bessis D, Caron O, Caux F, Collignon P, Coupier I, Cremin C, Dollfus H, Dugast C, Escudier B, Faivre L, Field M, Gilbert-Dussardier B, Janin N, Leport Y, Leroux D, Lipsker D, Malthieu F, McGilliwray B, Maugard C, Mejean A, Mortemousque I, Plessis G, Poppe B, Pruvost-Balland C, Rooker S, Roume J, Soufir N, Steinraths M, Tan MH, Theodore C, Thomas L, Vabres P, Van Glabeke E, Meric JB, Verkarre V, Lenoir G, Joulin V, Deveaux S, Cusin V, Feunteun J, Teh BT, Bressac-de Paillerets B, Richard S. (2011) Novel FH mutations in families with hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) and patients with isolated type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma. Journal of medical genetics. 48(4):226-34.

HEREDITARY LEIOMYOMATOSIS AND RENAL CELL CANCER; HLRCC. Online Medelian Inheritance in Man, OMIM®. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. MIM: 150800, (2015) World Wide Web URL: http://omim.org/

Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer. Orphanet encyclopedia, http://www.orpha.net/consor/cgi-bin/OC_Exp.php?lng=en&Expert=523

M Pithukpakorn, JR Toro. Hereditary Leiomyomatosis and Renal Cell Cancer. (2006) [Updated Aug 06 2015]. In: RA Pagon, MP Adam, HH Ardinger, et al., editors. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2026. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1252/

Pfaffenroth EC, Linehan WM. (2008) Genetic basis for kidney cancer: opportunity for disease-specific approaches to therapy. Expert opinion on biological therapy. 8(6):779-90.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion Number 534. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Well-Woman Visit.. Obstet Gynecol. 2012. Reaffirmed 2014;120:421-4. (2014) URL: http://www.acog.org/-/media/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Gynecologic-Practice/co534.pdf?dmc=1

Early Rule-Out Summary

This topic did not pass the early rule out stage due to insufficient evidence for actionability. However, the Actionability Working Group discussed and granted an exception to move this topic forward for a full evidence curation and summary report.

Findings of Early Rule-Out Assessment

  1. Is there a qualifying resource, such as a practice guideline or systematic review, for the genetic condition?
  2. Does the practice guideline or systematic review indicate that the result is actionable in one or more of the following ways?
  3. a. Patient Management

    b. Surveillance or Screening

    c. Circumstances to Avoid

  4. Is it actionable in an undiagnosed adult with the condition?
  5. Is this condition an important health problem?
  6. Is there at least on known pathogenic variant with at least moderate penetrance (≥40%) or moderate relative risk (≥2) in any population?