Dataset Information

Comparison of the clinical prediction model PREMM(1,2,6) and molecular testing for the systematic identification of Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Lynch syndrome is caused by germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations. The PREMM(1,2,6) model predicts the likelihood of a MMR gene mutation based on personal and family cancer history. OBJECTIVE:To compare strategies using PREMM(1,2,6) and tumour testing (microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining) to identify mutation carriers. DESIGN:Data from population-based or clinic-based patients with colorectal cancers enrolled through the Colon Cancer Family Registry were analysed. Evaluation included MSI, IHC and germline mutation analysis for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2. Personal and family cancer histories were used to calculate PREMM(1,2,6) predictions. Discriminative ability to identify carriers from non-carriers using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was assessed. Predictions were based on logistic regression models for (1) cancer assessment using PREMM(1,2,6), (2) MSI, (3) IHC for loss of any MMR protein expression, (4) MSI+IHC, (5) PREMM(1,2,6)+MSI, (6) PREMM(1,2,6)+IHC, (7) PREMM(1,2,6)+IHC+MSI. RESULTS:Among 1651 subjects, 239 (14%) had mutations (90 MLH1, 125 MSH2, 24 MSH6). PREMM(1,2,6) discriminated well with AUC 0.90 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.92). MSI alone, IHC alone, or MSI+IHC each had lower AUCs: 0.77, 0.82 and 0.82, respectively. The added value of IHC+PREMM(1,2,6) was slightly greater than PREMM(1,2,6)+MSI (AUC 0.94 vs 0.93). Adding MSI to PREMM(1,2,6)+IHC did not improve discrimination. CONCLUSION:PREMM(1,2,6) and IHC showed excellent performance in distinguishing mutation carriers from non-carriers and performed best when combined. MSI may have a greater role in distinguishing Lynch syndrome from other familial colorectal cancer subtypes among cases with high PREMM(1,2,6) scores where genetic evaluation does not disclose a MMR mutation.

SUBMITTER: Kastrinos F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3470824 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the clinical prediction model PREMM(1,2,6) and molecular testing for the systematic identification of Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer.

Kastrinos Fay F Steyerberg Ewout W EW Balmaña Judith J Mercado Rowena R Gallinger Steven S Haile Robert R Casey Graham G Hopper John L JL LeMarchand Loic L Lindor Noralane M NM Newcomb Polly A PA Thibodeau Stephen N SN Syngal Sapna S

Gut 20120216 2

<h4>Background</h4>Lynch syndrome is caused by germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations. The PREMM(1,2,6) model predicts the likelihood of a MMR gene mutation based on personal and family cancer history.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare strategies using PREMM(1,2,6) and tumour testing (microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining) to identify mutation carriers.<h4>Design</h4>Data from population-based or clinic-based patients with colorectal cancers enrolled throug ...[more]

PMID: 22345660

Similar Datasets

Project description:Lynch syndrome is the most common form of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) and is caused by germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Identification of gene carriers currently relies on germline analysis in patients with MMR-deficient tumors, but criteria to select individuals in whom tumor MMR testing should be performed are unclear.To establish a highly sensitive and efficient strategy for the identification of MMR gene mutation carriers among CRC probands.Pooled-data analysis of 4 large cohorts of newly diagnosed CRC probands recruited between 1994 and 2010 (n = 10,206) from the Colon Cancer Family Registry, the EPICOLON project, the Ohio State University, and the University of Helsinki examining personal, tumor-related, and family characteristics, as well as microsatellite instability, tumor MMR immunostaining, and germline MMR mutational status data.Performance characteristics of selected strategies (Bethesda guidelines, Jerusalem recommendations, and those derived from a bivariate/multivariate analysis of variables associated with Lynch syndrome) were compared with tumor MMR testing of all CRC patients (universal screening).Of 10,206 informative, unrelated CRC probands, 312 (3.1%) were MMR gene mutation carriers. In the population-based cohorts (n = 3671 probands), the universal screening approach (sensitivity, 100%; 95% CI, 99.3%-100%; specificity, 93.0%; 95% CI, 92.0%-93.7%; diagnostic yield, 2.2%; 95% CI, 1.7%-2.7%) was superior to the use of Bethesda guidelines (sensitivity, 87.8%; 95% CI, 78.9%-93.2%; specificity, 97.5%; 95% CI, 96.9%-98.0%; diagnostic yield, 2.0%; 95% CI, 1.5%-2.4%; P < .001), Jerusalem recommendations (sensitivity, 85.4%; 95% CI, 77.1%-93.6%; specificity, 96.7%; 95% CI, 96.0%-97.2%; diagnostic yield, 1.9%; 95% CI, 1.4%-2.3%; P < .001), and a selective strategy based on tumor MMR testing of cases with CRC diagnosed at age 70 years or younger and in older patients fulfilling the Bethesda guidelines (sensitivity, 95.1%; 95% CI, 89.8%-99.0%; specificity, 95.5%; 95% CI, 94.7%-96.1%; diagnostic yield, 2.1%; 95% CI, 1.6%-2.6%; P < .001). This selective strategy missed 4.9% of Lynch syndrome cases but resulted in 34.8% fewer cases requiring tumor MMR testing and 28.6% fewer cases undergoing germline mutational analysis than the universal approach.Universal tumor MMR testing among CRC probands had a greater sensitivity for the identification of Lynch syndrome compared with multiple alternative strategies, although the increase in the diagnostic yield was modest.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of systematic testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in people with incident colorectal cancer (CRC) in Australia.Design, setting, participantsWe investigated the impact of LS testing strategies in a micro-simulation model (Policy1-Lynch), explicitly modelling the cost of testing all patients diagnosed with incident CRC during 2017, with detailed modelling of outcomes for patients identified as LS carriers (probands) and their at-risk relatives throughout their lifetimes. For people with confirmed LS, we modelled ongoing colonoscopic surveillance.Main outcome measuresCost-effectiveness of six universal tumour testing strategies (testing for DNA mismatch repair deficiencies) and of universal germline gene panel testing of patients with incident CRC; impact on cost-effectiveness of restricting testing by age at CRC diagnosis (all ages, under 50/60/70 years) and of colonoscopic surveillance interval (one, two years).ResultsThe cost-effectiveness ratio of universal tumour testing strategies (annual colonoscopic surveillance, no testing age limit) compared with no testing ranged from $28 915 to $31 904/life-year saved (LYS) (indicative willingness-to-pay threshold: $30 000-$50 000/LYS). These strategies could avert 184-189 CRC deaths with an additional 30 597-31 084 colonoscopies over the lifetimes of 1000 patients with incident CRC with LS and 1420 confirmed LS carrier relatives (164-166 additional colonoscopies/death averted). The most cost-effective strategy was immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER], $28 915/LYS). Universal germline gene panel testing was not cost-effective compared with universal tumour testing strategies (ICER, $2.4 million/LYS). Immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing was cost-effective at all age limits when paired with 2-yearly colonoscopic surveillance (ICER, $11 525-$32 153/LYS), and required 4778-15 860 additional colonoscopies to avert 46-181 CRC deaths (88-103 additional colonoscopies/death averted).ConclusionsUniversal tumour testing strategies for guiding germline genetic testing of people with incident CRC for LS in Australia are likely to be cost-effective compared with no testing. Universal germline gene panel testing would not currently be cost-effective.

Project description:Objective:This study aimed to compare the molecular, clinical, and pathological characteristics and pedigrees of familial colorectal cancer type X (FCCTX) with those of Lynch syndrome (LS) to provide a theoretical basis for the management of FCCTX. Methods:Overall, 46 cases of FCCTX and 47 LS probands and affected families were enrolled between June 2008 and September 2018 for this study. Multigene cancer panel tests that included 139 genes were performed for all patients, and variants in each group were described. The clinical, pathological, and pedigree characteristics were also compared between the two groups. Results:In total, 42 variants were detected in 27 (58.7%) cases in the FCCTX group, with BRCA1, BRCA2, POLE, POLD1, ATR, and ATM being the most frequently mutated genes. The mean onset age of colorectal cancer (CRC) was significantly older in the FCCTX group than in the LS group (53.57 ± 12.88 years vs. 44.36 ± 11.26 years, t = -9.204, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with rectal cancer was also higher in the FCCTX group than in the LS group [43.5% (20/46) vs. 10.6% (5/47), ?2 = 12.823, p = 0.005]. Within a median follow-up time of 53.9 ± 37.0 months, the proportion of patients who developed metachronous CRC was significantly higher in the LS group than in the FCCTX group [34.0% (16/47) vs. 13.0% (6/46), ?2 = 5.676, p = 0.017]. When comparing pedigrees, older age at cancer onset and rectal cancer clustering were observed in the FCCTX families. A higher prevalence in male patients was also observed in the FCCTX families. Conclusion:FCCTX is an entity distinct from LS, but its genetic etiology remains unknown. A larger multigene panel would be recommended for determining the underlying pathogenic variants. Considering the pathology and moderate penetrance of the CRC link to FCCTX, less stringent surgical treatments and colonoscopy surveillance would be preferable. Rectum preference is a typical feature of FCCTX. Colonoscopy surveillance in FCCTX families could be less intensive, and more attention should be given to male members.

Dataset Information

Comparison of the clinical prediction model PREMM(1,2,6) and molecular testing for the systematic identification of Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer.

Publications

Comparison of the clinical prediction model PREMM(1,2,6) and molecular testing for the systematic identification of Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure