Nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome (Gorlin syndrome)


Evidence Levels: A Double-blind study B Clinical trial ≥ 20 subjects C Clinical trial < 20 subjects D Series ≥ 5 subjects E Anecdotal case reports

Courtesy of Maral Kibarian Skelsey, Gary L. Peck

Gorlin (nevoid basal cell nevus, Gorlin–Goltz) syndrome (GS) is an autosomal dominant syndrome characterized dermatologically, especially by the development of large numbers of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs). The age at which the first BCC is seen and the lifetime numbers of BCCs vary significantly – can start as early as childhood and in dozens to hundreds – likely due to varying exposure to ambient sunlight (e.g., earlier and in higher numbers in Australia than in England) and to genetic predisposition (e.g., many fewer BCCs in persons of East Asian or African descent than in those of European descent, factors that also affect the development of sporadic BCCs). In addition, Gorlin patients may have multiple systemic manifestations, including, among others, palmar or plantar pits, odontogenic keratocysts of the jaw, ectopic intracranial calcification (particularly of the falx cerebri), fused or bifid ribs, macrocephaly, cleft lip/palate, coarse facies, hypertelorism, medulloblastomas, cardiac and ovarian fibromas, lymphomesenteric cysts, pectus deformity, and syndactyly of the digits (Gorlin 2004).

Inactivating mutations in the Patched (PTCH1) tumor suppressor gene underlie most cases of GS but approximately 5% of patients’ causative mutations inactivate the Suppressor of Fused (SUFU) gene. Both genes encode proteins that inhibit activation of the hedgehog (HH) signaling pathway, specifically activation of the smoothened protein (PTCH1) or of the more downstream SUFU. Therefore, drugs (e.g., vismodegib or sonidegib) that effectively block smoothened activity can replace the function of the defective PTCH1 protein and effectively block HH signaling but are less effective at blocking HH activation due to loss of SUFU protein. Of note, the development of childhood medulloblastomas, a classic manifestation of GS, is approximately ×20 more frequent in patients with SUFU mutations than in families with PTCH1 mutations. GS patients with SUFU mutations also are more likely to develop meningiomas and less likely to develop jaw cysts than are GS patients with PTCH1 mutations.

Management Strategy

Despite advances in molecular understanding, the diagnosis of GS currently generally depends on identification of clinical abnormalities, most commonly for those patients seen by dermatologists the development of multiple BCCs or of at least one BCC before the age of 20, the presence of three or more palmoplantar pits, and by jaw cysts. Dermatologic management of GS patients focuses on patient education, tumor prevention, and treatment of BCCs while optimizing cosmesis and minimizing discomfort and cost.

Patient education should include information on avoidance of sun exposure and the necessity of avoiding unnecessary ionizing radiation (IR) exposure, as GS patients are especially susceptible to the development of BCCs in areas of IR, as well as genetic counseling. Patients who avoid sunlight should be tested regularly for vitamin D deficiency and given D 3 supplements as needed. Complete skin examinations should be performed at least annually and more frequently after the development of the first BCC. Dermatologists can advocate and provide resources including referrals to other specialists for diagnosis and treatment of extracutaneous manifestations of GS, e.g., annual ophthalmologic and dental examinations. Pediatric GS patients especially should be monitored for development, vision, speech, and hearing. A baseline echocardiogram can identify the rare cardiac fibroma. Pelvic ultrasound of girls who have reached puberty can assess for ovarian fibromas. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is preferable when possible, e.g., for assessing for jaw cysts. An annual MRI of the head is recommended until the age of 8, when medulloblastoma becomes less common.

Genetic testing generally can be limited to the following situations: (1) when future prenatal testing is likely; (2) for establishing the diagnosis in patients whose clinical criteria are ambiguous; and (3) for screening an asymptomatic patient who is at risk because of an affected family member.

Patients with GS need emotional support as they undergo multiple treatments that may result in scarring and deformity. They may benefit from regular screening for depression and referral to a support network (e.g., https://gorlinsyndrome.org ; https://gorlingroup.org ).

The size and numbers of BCCs, especially in those with type I and II skin, the often young age at presentation, and the distribution on the head and neck, pose challenges greater than those associated with sporadic BCC. Nonetheless, with the notable exception of radiotherapy, which should be avoided, treatment generally is based on the same modalities as are used for sporadic BCCs including surgery; photodynamic therapy (PDT); and topical, injectable, and systemic therapy, including vismodegib and sonidegib, HH pathway inhibitors that bind SMO protein, and, if all else fails, chemotherapeutic drugs.

The role of chemoprevention (prophylactic therapy to reduce the incidence of new BCCs) is still unclear. Evidence for its efficacy in GS is inconclusive, except for vismodegib, which may be useful in severe cases, if patients tolerate its common side effects.

This chapter focuses largely on literature specific to GS; that on BCC gives a broader review of the management of this tumor. One difference is that in some GS patients much of the skin, at least near BCCs, has BCC-like budding from the base of the epidermis, making a ‘clear surgical margin’ essentially impossible.

Specific Investigations

  • Radiologic studies

  • Vitamin D level

  • Genetic studies (in selected cases)

Nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome

Evans DG, Farndon PA. 2002 Jun 20 [Updated 2018 Mar 29]. In: Adan MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al., eds. GeneReviews [Internet]. Seattle: University of Washington, Seattle, 1993–2020.

This is a very extensive, highly authoritative review of GS with detailed suggestions for management.

Consensus statement from the first international colloquium on basal cell nevus syndrome (BCNS)

Bree AF, Shah MR, BCNS Colloquium Group. Am J Med Genet A 2011; 155: 2091–7.

This is a multidisciplinary consensus group’s statement on the diagnostic criteria for GS and protocols for evaluation and surveillance of pediatric and adult patients.

High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in patients with basal cell nevus syndrome

Tang J, Wu A, Linos E, et al. Arch Dermatol 2010; 146: 1105–10.

GS patients participating in a trial of vismodegib were three times more likely to be vitamin D deficient than were matched controls (56% vs. 18%; p <0.001).

First-Line Therapies

  • Surgical management

  • B

  • Mohs micrographic surgery

  • B

  • Avoidance of ultraviolet light and radiotherapy

  • B

  • Imiquimod, 5-FU, and PDT for superficial BCCs

  • B

Diagnosis and treatment of basal cell carcinoma: European consensus–based interdisciplinary guidelines

Peris P, Fargnoli MC, Garbe C, et al. Eur J Cancer 2019: 118: 10–34.

This extensive, authoritative review of BCC management includes a section on BCCs in GS patients, among the ‘hard to treat’ patients, recommending that their BCC treatment mirror that of sporadic BCCs with an emphasis on educating the patient regarding non-BCC complications and the importance of sun avoidance/protection and frequent examinations to identify and treat BCCs when they are small rather than waiting for them to become larger, at which time the degree of scarring and recurrence becomes greater.

Guidelines of care for the management of basal cell carcinoma

Bichajian C, Armstrong A, Baum C, et al. J Amer Acad Dermatol 2018; 78: 540–59.

Reflecting different treatment approaches in Europe vs. America, this consensus statement focuses more on surgery and less on other treatment modalities. Its appraisal of current data leads to their conclusion that neither laser treatment nor retinoid prevention is recommended for BCCs.

Consensus for nonmelanoma skin cancer treatment: basal cell carcinoma, including a cost analysis of treatment methods

Kauvar AN, Cronin T, Roenigk R. Dermatol Surg 2015; 41: 550–71.

Tumor factors associated with increased recurrence rates of BCC include location on the ‘mask’ area of the midface, hands, feet, and genitalia; size over 20 cm on the torso or extremities and 10 mm or larger in the non-mask areas of the face; micronodular, infiltrative, sclerosing, morpheaform, or desmoplastic histologic subtypes; ill-defined margins; prior recurrence; and perineural invasion. Host factors linked to high-risk BCC include occurrence in a site of prior radiation or scar, immunosuppression, genetic syndrome, and age younger than 40.

The nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome: sensitivity to ultraviolet and x-ray irradiation

Frentz G, Munch-Petersen B, Wulf HC. J Am Acad Dermatol 1987; 17: 637–43.

Radiation therapy should be avoided in patients with GS because these patients frequently develop BCCs as a consequence of radiotherapy directed, for example, for medulloblastomas or BCCs, often within 6 months to 3 years, unlike the usual 20- to 30-year lag for IR-induced tumors seen in patients with sporadic BCC.

Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing effectiveness of photodynamic therapy, topical imiquimod, and 5-fluorouracil in patients with superficial basal cell carcinoma

Jansen MHE, Mosterd K, Arits AHMM. J Invest Dermatol 2018; 138: 527–33.

This large, long-term study randomized 200 patients (85% monitored for 5 years), each with a sporadic, biopsy-confirmed superficial BCC, into each of three groups, using PDT (two treatments separated by 1 week with MAL-PDT), imiquimod (applied 6 weeks, daily 5×/week), or 5-FU (applied 4 weeks twice daily). The probability of recurrence-free survival was 63% for PDT, 70% for 5-FU, and 81% for imiquimod. The results of the latter two were statistically better than that for PDT; results for imiquimod were better than that for 5-FU, albeit not of formal statistical significance. Patients may choose different alternatives depending on cost, ease of treatment (e.g., some patients cannot apply topicals to their back), and their perception of the importance of these differences in the cure rates, but these data (although in sporadic patients) allow more authoritative counseling. These modalities treat nodular BCCs less successfully and hence generally are at best reserved for third-line treatment of deeper BCCs; they can be first-line treatments for superficial BCCs.

Second-Line Therapy

  • Electrodesiccation and curettage

  • B

You're Reading a Preview

Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles

Become membership

If you are a member. Log in here