CONTEXT: Identifying families at high risk for the Lynch syndrome (ie, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) is critical for both genetic counseling and cancer prevention. Current clinical guidelines are effective but limited by applicability and cost. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a genetic counseling and risk prediction tool that estimates the probability of carrying a deleterious mutation in mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 and the probability of developing colorectal or endometrial cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: External validation of the MMRpro model was conducted on 279 individuals from 226 clinic-based families in the United States, Canada, and Australia (referred between 1993-2005) by comparing model predictions with results of highly sensitive germline mutation detection techniques. MMRpro models the autosomal dominant inheritance of mismatch repair mutations, with parameters based on meta-analyses of the penetrance and prevalence of mutations and of the predictive values of tumor characteristics. The model's prediction is tailored to each individual's detailed family history information on colorectal and endometrial cancer and to tumor characteristics including microsatellite instability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ability of MMRpro to correctly predict mutation carrier status, as measured by operating characteristics, calibration, and overall accuracy. RESULTS: In the independent validation, MMRpro provided a concordance index of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.88) and a ratio of observed to predicted cases of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.05). This results in higher accuracy than existing alternatives and current clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: MMRpro is a broadly applicable, accurate prediction model that can contribute to current screening and genetic counseling practices in a high-risk population. It is more sensitive and more specific than existing clinical guidelines for identifying individuals who may benefit from MMR germline testing. It is applicable to individuals for whom tumor samples are not available and to individuals in whom germline testing finds no mutation.
CONTEXT: Identifying families at high risk for the Lynch syndrome (ie, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) is critical for both genetic counseling and cancer prevention. Current clinical guidelines are effective but limited by applicability and cost. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a genetic counseling and risk prediction tool that estimates the probability of carrying a deleterious mutation in mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6 and the probability of developing colorectal or endometrial cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: External validation of the MMRpro model was conducted on 279 individuals from 226 clinic-based families in the United States, Canada, and Australia (referred between 1993-2005) by comparing model predictions with results of highly sensitive germline mutation detection techniques. MMRpro models the autosomal dominant inheritance of mismatch repair mutations, with parameters based on meta-analyses of the penetrance and prevalence of mutations and of the predictive values of tumor characteristics. The model's prediction is tailored to each individual's detailed family history information on colorectal and endometrial cancer and to tumor characteristics including microsatellite instability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ability of MMRpro to correctly predict mutation carrier status, as measured by operating characteristics, calibration, and overall accuracy. RESULTS: In the independent validation, MMRpro provided a concordance index of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.88) and a ratio of observed to predicted cases of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.05). This results in higher accuracy than existing alternatives and current clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: MMRpro is a broadly applicable, accurate prediction model that can contribute to current screening and genetic counseling practices in a high-risk population. It is more sensitive and more specific than existing clinical guidelines for identifying individuals who may benefit from MMR germline testing. It is applicable to individuals for whom tumor samples are not available and to individuals in whom germline testing finds no mutation.
Authors: A Loukola; R Salovaara; P Kristo; A L Moisio; H Kääriäinen; H Ahtola; M Eskelinen; N Härkönen; R Julkunen; E Kangas; S Ojala; J Tulikoura; E Valkamo; H Järvinen; J P Mecklin; A de la Chapelle; L A Aaltonen Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Jinru Shia; David S Klimstra; Khedoudja Nafa; Kenneth Offit; Jose G Guillem; Arnold J Markowitz; William L Gerald; Nathan A Ellis Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Heather Hampel; Julie A Stephens; Eero Pukkala; Risto Sankila; Lauri A Aaltonen; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Sanjay Kakar; Lawrence J Burgart; Stephen N Thibodeau; Kari G Rabe; Gloria M Petersen; Richard M Goldberg; Noralane M Lindor Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: D Calistri; S Presciuttini; G Buonsanti; P Radice; I Gazzoli; V Pensotti; P Sala; M Eboli; S Andreola; A Russo; M Pierotti; L Bertario; G N Ranzani Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2000-01-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: C Lamberti; R Kruse; C Ruelfs; R Caspari; Y Wang; M Jungck; M Mathiak; H R Malayeri; W Friedl; T Sauerbruch; P Propping Journal: Gut Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Barbara M Buttin; Matthew A Powell; David G Mutch; Sheri A Babb; Phyllis C Huettner; Tina Bocker Edmonston; Thomas J Herzog; Janet S Rader; Randall K Gibb; Alison J Whelan; Paul J Goodfellow Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2004-04-19 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Paolo Peterlongo; Khedoudja Nafa; Gabriel S Lerman; Emily Glogowski; Jinru Shia; Tian Z Ye; Arnold J Markowitz; José G Guillem; Prema Kolachana; Jeffrey A Boyd; Kenneth Offit; Nathan A Ellis Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2003-11-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Aung Ko Win; Mark A Jenkins; Daniel D Buchanan; Mark Clendenning; Joanne P Young; Graham G Giles; Jack Goldblatt; Barbara A Leggett; John L Hopper; Stephen N Thibodeau; Noralane M Lindor Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Andreas Obermair; Danny R Youlden; Joanne P Young; Noralane M Lindor; John A Baron; Polly Newcomb; Susan Parry; John L Hopper; Robert Haile; Mark A Jenkins Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: E Lastra; M García-González; B Llorente; C Bernuy; M J Barrio; L Pérez-Cabornero; M Durán; C García-Girón Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Fay Kastrinos; Ewout W Steyerberg; Rowena Mercado; Judith Balmaña; Spring Holter; Steven Gallinger; Kimberly D Siegmund; James M Church; Mark A Jenkins; Noralane M Lindor; Stephen N Thibodeau; Lynn Anne Burbidge; Richard J Wenstrup; Sapna Syngal Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Miguel Serrano; Pedro Lage; Sara Belga; Bruno Filipe; Inês Francisco; Paula Rodrigues; Ricardo Fonseca; Paula Chaves; Isabel Claro; Cristina Albuquerque; António Dias Pereira Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Aung Ko Win; Noralane M Lindor; Ingrid Winship; Katherine M Tucker; Daniel D Buchanan; Joanne P Young; Christophe Rosty; Barbara Leggett; Graham G Giles; Jack Goldblatt; Finlay A Macrae; Susan Parry; Matthew F Kalady; John A Baron; Dennis J Ahnen; Loic Le Marchand; Steven Gallinger; Robert W Haile; Polly A Newcomb; John L Hopper; Mark A Jenkins Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-02-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Amanda S Bruegl; Bojana Djordjevic; Brittany Batte; Molly Daniels; Bryan Fellman; Diana Urbauer; Rajyalakshmi Luthra; Charlotte Sun; Karen H Lu; Russell R Broaddus Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2014-04-25