OBJECTIVES: Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC) and is due to germline mutations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Early Lynch syndrome diagnosis and appropriate CRC surveillance improves mortality. Traditional qualitative clinical criteria including Amsterdam and Bethesda guidelines may miss mutation carriers. Recently, quantitative predictive models including MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro were developed to facilitate diagnosis. However, these models remain to be externally validated in the United States. Therefore, we evaluated the test characteristics of Lynch syndrome predictive models in a tertiary referral group at two US academic centers. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on 230 consecutive individuals who underwent genetic testing for MMR gene mutations at the University of Chicago and University of California at San Francisco's Cancer Risk Clinics. Each individual's risk of mutation was examined using MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro. Amsterdam and Bethesda criteria were also determined. Testing characteristics were calculated for each of the models. RESULTS: We included 230 individuals in the combined cohort. In all, 113 (49%) probands were MMR mutation carriers. Areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves were 0.76, 0.78, and 0.82 for MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro, respectively. While similar in overall performance, our study highlights unique test characteristics of these three quantitative models including comparisons of sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, we identify characteristics of mutation carriers who were missed by each model. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, all three Lynch syndrome predictive models performed comparably in our multi-center US referral population. These results suggest that Lynch syndrome predictive models can be used to screen for MMR mutation carriers and can provide improved test characteristics compared with traditional clinical criteria. Identification of MMR mutation carriers is paramount as appropriate screening can prevent CRC mortality in this high-risk group.
OBJECTIVES:Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC) and is due to germline mutations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes. Early Lynch syndrome diagnosis and appropriate CRC surveillance improves mortality. Traditional qualitative clinical criteria including Amsterdam and Bethesda guidelines may miss mutation carriers. Recently, quantitative predictive models including MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro were developed to facilitate diagnosis. However, these models remain to be externally validated in the United States. Therefore, we evaluated the test characteristics of Lynch syndrome predictive models in a tertiary referral group at two US academic centers. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on 230 consecutive individuals who underwent genetic testing for MMR gene mutations at the University of Chicago and University of California at San Francisco's Cancer Risk Clinics. Each individual's risk of mutation was examined using MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro. Amsterdam and Bethesda criteria were also determined. Testing characteristics were calculated for each of the models. RESULTS: We included 230 individuals in the combined cohort. In all, 113 (49%) probands were MMR mutation carriers. Areas under the receiver operator characteristic curves were 0.76, 0.78, and 0.82 for MMRPredict, PREMM(1,2,6), and MMRPro, respectively. While similar in overall performance, our study highlights unique test characteristics of these three quantitative models including comparisons of sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, we identify characteristics of mutation carriers who were missed by each model. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, all three Lynch syndrome predictive models performed comparably in our multi-center US referral population. These results suggest that Lynch syndrome predictive models can be used to screen for MMR mutation carriers and can provide improved test characteristics compared with traditional clinical criteria. Identification of MMR mutation carriers is paramount as appropriate screening can prevent CRC mortality in this high-risk group.
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: C J Pouchet; N Wong; G Chong; M J Sheehan; G Schneider; B Rosen-Sheidley; W Foulkes; M Tischkowitz Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-01-22 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Jose G Monzon; Carol Cremin; Linlea Armstrong; Jennifer Nuk; Sean Young; Doug E Horsman; Kristy Garbutt; Chris D Bajdik; Sharlene Gill Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2010-02-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: H J Järvinen; M Aarnio; H Mustonen; K Aktan-Collan; L A Aaltonen; P Peltomäki; A De La Chapelle; J P Mecklin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Sining Chen; Wenyi Wang; Shing Lee; Khedoudja Nafa; Johanna Lee; Kathy Romans; Patrice Watson; Stephen B Gruber; David Euhus; Kenneth W Kinzler; Jeremy Jass; Steven Gallinger; Noralane M Lindor; Graham Casey; Nathan Ellis; Francis M Giardiello; Kenneth Offit; Giovanni Parmigiani Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-09-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Heather Hampel; Wendy L Frankel; Edward Martin; Mark Arnold; Karamjit Khanduja; Philip Kuebler; Hidewaki Nakagawa; Kaisa Sotamaa; Thomas W Prior; Judith Westman; Jenny Panescu; Dan Fix; Janet Lockman; Ilene Comeras; Albert de la Chapelle Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-05-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Balmaña; F Balaguer; S Castellví-Bel; E W Steyerberg; M Andreu; X Llor; R Jover; A Castells; S Syngal Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2008-06-25 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Fay Kastrinos; Hajime Uno; Chinedu Ukaegbu; Carmelita Alvero; Ashley McFarland; Matthew B Yurgelun; Matthew H Kulke; Deborah Schrag; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Charles S Fuchs; Robert J Mayer; Kimmie Ng; Ewout W Steyerberg; Sapna Syngal Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul C Schroy; John B Wong; Michael J O'Brien; Clara A Chen; John L Griffith Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-05-26 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Julie-Anne Tanner; Jennifer Hensel; Paige E Davies; Lisa C Brown; Bryan M Dechairo; Benoit H Mulsant Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2019-12-13 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Fay Kastrinos; Rohit P Ojha; Celine Leenen; Carmelita Alvero; Rowena C Mercado; Judith Balmaña; Irene Valenzuela; Francesc Balaguer; Roger Green; Noralane M Lindor; Stephen N Thibodeau; Polly Newcomb; Aung Ko Win; Mark Jenkins; Daniel D Buchanan; Lucio Bertario; Paola Sala; Heather Hampel; Sapna Syngal; Ewout W Steyerberg Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 13.506