Cargando…

Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review

BACKGROUND: The emerging dual imperatives of personalized medicine and technologic advances make population screening for preventable conditions resulting from genetic alterations a realistic possibility. Lynch syndrome is a potential screening target due to its prevalence, penetrance, and the avail...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prince, Anya E R, Cadigan, R Jean, Henderson, Gail E, Evans, James P, Adams, Michael, Coker-Schwimmer, Emmanuel, Penn, Dolly C, Van Riper, Marcia, Corbie-Smith, Giselle, Jonas, Daniel E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28260941
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PGPM.S123808
_version_ 1782510318277099520
author Prince, Anya E R
Cadigan, R Jean
Henderson, Gail E
Evans, James P
Adams, Michael
Coker-Schwimmer, Emmanuel
Penn, Dolly C
Van Riper, Marcia
Corbie-Smith, Giselle
Jonas, Daniel E
author_facet Prince, Anya E R
Cadigan, R Jean
Henderson, Gail E
Evans, James P
Adams, Michael
Coker-Schwimmer, Emmanuel
Penn, Dolly C
Van Riper, Marcia
Corbie-Smith, Giselle
Jonas, Daniel E
author_sort Prince, Anya E R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The emerging dual imperatives of personalized medicine and technologic advances make population screening for preventable conditions resulting from genetic alterations a realistic possibility. Lynch syndrome is a potential screening target due to its prevalence, penetrance, and the availability of well-established, preventive interventions. However, while population screening may lower incidence of preventable conditions, implementation without evidence may lead to unintentional harms. We examined the literature to determine whether evidence exists that screening for Lynch-associated mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations leads to improved overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or quality of life. Documenting evidence and gaps is critical to implementing genomic approaches in public health and guiding future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our 2014–2015 systematic review identified studies comparing screening with no screening in the general population, and controlled studies assessing analytic validity of targeted next-generation sequencing, and benefits or harms of interventions or screening. We conducted meta-analyses for the association between early or more frequent colonoscopies and health outcomes. RESULTS: Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria. No adequate evidence directly addressed the main question or the harms of screening in the general population. Meta-analyses found relative reductions of 68% for colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.23–0.43, three cohort studies, 590 participants) and 78% for all-cause mortality (relative risk: 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.09–0.56, three cohort studies, 590 participants) for early or more frequent colonoscopies among family members of people with cancer who also had an associated MMR gene mutation. CONCLUSION: Inadequate evidence exists examining harms and benefits of population-based screening for Lynch syndrome. Lack of evidence highlights the need for data that directly compare benefits and harms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5325104
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53251042017-03-03 Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review Prince, Anya E R Cadigan, R Jean Henderson, Gail E Evans, James P Adams, Michael Coker-Schwimmer, Emmanuel Penn, Dolly C Van Riper, Marcia Corbie-Smith, Giselle Jonas, Daniel E Pharmgenomics Pers Med Review BACKGROUND: The emerging dual imperatives of personalized medicine and technologic advances make population screening for preventable conditions resulting from genetic alterations a realistic possibility. Lynch syndrome is a potential screening target due to its prevalence, penetrance, and the availability of well-established, preventive interventions. However, while population screening may lower incidence of preventable conditions, implementation without evidence may lead to unintentional harms. We examined the literature to determine whether evidence exists that screening for Lynch-associated mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations leads to improved overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or quality of life. Documenting evidence and gaps is critical to implementing genomic approaches in public health and guiding future research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our 2014–2015 systematic review identified studies comparing screening with no screening in the general population, and controlled studies assessing analytic validity of targeted next-generation sequencing, and benefits or harms of interventions or screening. We conducted meta-analyses for the association between early or more frequent colonoscopies and health outcomes. RESULTS: Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria. No adequate evidence directly addressed the main question or the harms of screening in the general population. Meta-analyses found relative reductions of 68% for colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.23–0.43, three cohort studies, 590 participants) and 78% for all-cause mortality (relative risk: 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.09–0.56, three cohort studies, 590 participants) for early or more frequent colonoscopies among family members of people with cancer who also had an associated MMR gene mutation. CONCLUSION: Inadequate evidence exists examining harms and benefits of population-based screening for Lynch syndrome. Lack of evidence highlights the need for data that directly compare benefits and harms. Dove Medical Press 2017-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5325104/ /pubmed/28260941 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PGPM.S123808 Text en © 2017 Prince et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Prince, Anya E R
Cadigan, R Jean
Henderson, Gail E
Evans, James P
Adams, Michael
Coker-Schwimmer, Emmanuel
Penn, Dolly C
Van Riper, Marcia
Corbie-Smith, Giselle
Jonas, Daniel E
Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title_full Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title_fullStr Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title_short Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review
title_sort is there evidence that we should screen the general population for lynch syndrome with genetic testing? a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28260941
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PGPM.S123808
work_keys_str_mv AT princeanyaer isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT cadiganrjean isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT hendersongaile isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT evansjamesp isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT adamsmichael isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT cokerschwimmeremmanuel isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT penndollyc isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT vanripermarcia isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT corbiesmithgiselle isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview
AT jonasdaniele isthereevidencethatweshouldscreenthegeneralpopulationforlynchsyndromewithgenetictestingasystematicreview