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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |