See accompanying article on page 2345Li Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is one of the most well-recognized cancer predisposition syndromes and serves as a paradigm for the study of heritable susceptibility to cancer. LFS was first reported in 1969 by Li and Fraumeni on the basis of the identification of four families characterized by the autosomal dominant transmission of early-onset tumors. 1,2 Individuals with LFS are predisposed to develop six core component tumors, including soft tissue and bone sarcomas, breast cancer, CNS tumors, adrenocortical carcinomas (ACCs), and acute leukemias, 3 as well as a spectrum of other neoplasms that occur less commonly but at higher frequencies and at younger ages compared with the general population. 4-7 Individuals with LFS are also prone to develop second malignant neoplasms (SMNs); the risk is greatest in those who survive cancer during childhood. 8 In 1990, it was determined that LFS is caused by heterozygous germline mutations in TP53, which encodes the p53 tumor suppressor. 9 Also known as the so-called guardian of the genome, p53 is a critical transcription factor that promotes cell-cycle arrest, apoptosis, and DNA repair in response to cellular stresses such as exposure to ionizing radiation. 10 Mutations that interfere with the transcriptional activity of p53 reduce its growth suppressive functions. Accordingly, individuals with LFS, who harbor one mutated copy of TP53 in the germline, are at increased risk for tumor formation.The discovery of TP53 as the gene that is defective in LFS has paved the way for its analysis in cancer-prone individuals and families; more than 500 patients with LFS have been described in the literature, 11 and many more have been identified but not yet reported. It is currently estimated that the TP53 mutation carrier rate is at least one in 5,000. 12 LFS is more common in Southern Brazil because of the presence of an R337H founder mutation that has a high population prevalence of nearly 0.3%. [13][14][15] The spectrum of LFS-associated TP53 mutations can be separated into two general categories on the basis of the mutations' effects on p53 function. The first category includes missense alterations within the DNA binding domain, which confer a dominant-negative effect on wild-type p53 function, as well as enable mutated p53 to acquire additional activities that promote cancer development (these are collectively referred to as gain of function mutations). The second category includes nonsense and frame shift mutations, as well as partial or whole gene deletions, which confer a loss of function. 11 Although initial genetic studies allowed for a better understanding of the incidence and spectrum of LFS-associated TP53 mutations, many questions have remained unanswered regarding the relationship between TP53 genotype and LFS phenotype. For example, what are the age-specific cancer risks for children and adults with LFS? How do these risks differ depending on the underlying TP53 mutation? How do tumor stage, pathology, and outcome differ in individua...