Literature DB >> 10844916

Value of predictive genetic testing in management of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)

A J Stanley1, C L Gaff, A K Aittomäki, L C Fabre, F A Macrae, J St John.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of predictive genetic testing on colonoscopic surveillance in an extended family with hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC).
SETTING: Familial Bowel Cancer Service, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria.
SUBJECTS: 96 people registered with the Service who were apparently unaffected members of an extended family that met the classic Amsterdam criteria for HNPCC and carried an MLH1 gene mutation (IVS9 + 3insT). INTERVENTION: Predictive genetic testing was offered in a cascade manner to at-risk family members; mutation-positive individuals were advised to have annual colonoscopic surveillance, while mutation-negative individuals were withdrawn from surveillance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Previous compliance with recommended colonoscopic surveillance; uptake and results of genetic testing; expected effect of genetic test results on number of colonoscopies over five years.
RESULTS: 22 of the 96 family members (23%) were not complying with recommended surveillance. Of 48 individuals offered predictive genetic testing, 41 (85%) responded and 39 (81%) underwent testing. Seven of the 39 (18%) were positive for the family-specific mutation, and 32 (82%) were negative. The 39 tested individuals and 37 of their descendants who were registered with the screening program had undergone 70 colonoscopies in the five years before genetic testing. In the five years after testing, only 37 surveillance colonoscopies were planned (annual or two-yearly colonoscopies for the six mutation-positive individuals and five-yearly colonoscopies for four mutation-negative individuals with previously identified adenoma), an almost 50% reduction in colonoscopies.
CONCLUSION: Predictive genetic testing in HNPCC families allows many individuals to be withdrawn from regular colonoscopic surveillance. It may therefore reduce costs, as well as have emotional benefits for many individuals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10844916     DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2000.tb123976.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med J Aust        ISSN: 0025-729X            Impact factor:   7.738


  7 in total

1.  Prevalence and predictors of appropriate colorectal cancer surveillance in Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Elena M Stoffel; Rowena C Mercado; Wendy Kohlmann; Beth Ford; Shilpa Grover; Peggy Conrad; Amie Blanco; Kristen M Shannon; Mark Powell; Daniel C Chung; Jonathan Terdiman; Stephen B Gruber; Sapna Syngal
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 10.864

2.  A mobile colonoscopic unit for lynch syndrome: trends in surveillance uptake and patient experiences of screening in a developing country.

Authors:  Zandrè Bruwer; Merle Futter; Raj Ramesar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Quality in genetic counselling for presymptomatic testing--clinical guidelines for practice across the range of genetic conditions.

Authors:  Heather Skirton; Lesley Goldsmith; Leigh Jackson; Aad Tibben
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Predictive genetic testing of first degree relatives of mutation carriers is a cost-effective strategy in preventing hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer in Singapore.

Authors:  Vivian Wei Wang; Poh Koon Koh; Wai Leng Chow; Jeremy Fung Yen Lim
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.375

5.  Genetic-based biomarkers and next-generation sequencing: the future of personalized care in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Redecca Y Kim; Hua Xu; Samuel Myllykangas; Hanlee Ji
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 6.  EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Glenn E Palomaki; Monica R McClain; Stephanie Melillo; Heather L Hampel; Stephen N Thibodeau
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 8.822

7.  Men's values-based factors on prostate cancer risk genetic testing: a telephone survey.

Authors:  David J Doukas; Yuelin Li
Journal:  BMC Med Genet       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 2.103

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.