Timothy A Gregory1, Peter Simon B Molina1, Gregory D Phillips2, John W Henson3. 1. Department of Medicine, Neurology Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl, Germany. 3. Ben and Catherine Ivy Center for Advanced Brain Tumor Treatment Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Abstract
Background: Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a common tumor predisposition syndrome with varying manifestations and severity. Adult NF1 patients often experience fragmented care, so we sought to characterize the health and demographic features of a community-based population of adults with NF1 and hypothesized that lack of a specialty clinic for adult NF1 patients correlates with unmet needs. Methods: Retrospective case-control study of all adult cases of NF1 among 4.06 million medical records in a Pacific Northwest population. 122 case charts were reviewed to ascertain NF1 disease features, comorbidities, and severity of disease. A 1:1 control cohort was selected by matching case/control by age, sex, and ZIP code to compare demographic features and health status. Results: Adult NF1 patients were less likely to have private insurance, be employed, and have children, but were equally likely to be married. One half of cases had disease features compromising health and well-being, and care involved 26 different specialties. Excluding neurofibromas, 43% of cases had cancer compared to 10% of controls [P < .0001, OR 5.38 (2.53-11.4)]. Only 27% of women ages 30-50 had undergone age-appropriate enhanced breast cancer surveillance. Behavioral health problems were found in 60% of NF1 patients compared to 37% of controls [P < .001, OR 2.61 (1.52-4.50)]. 93% of cases referred to a NF1 specialty center underwent a change in management upon establishing care. Conclusions: NF1 patients may benefit from coordinated management of care in a specialty center. Published by Oxford University Press 2022.
Background: Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a common tumor predisposition syndrome with varying manifestations and severity. Adult NF1 patients often experience fragmented care, so we sought to characterize the health and demographic features of a community-based population of adults with NF1 and hypothesized that lack of a specialty clinic for adult NF1 patients correlates with unmet needs. Methods: Retrospective case-control study of all adult cases of NF1 among 4.06 million medical records in a Pacific Northwest population. 122 case charts were reviewed to ascertain NF1 disease features, comorbidities, and severity of disease. A 1:1 control cohort was selected by matching case/control by age, sex, and ZIP code to compare demographic features and health status. Results: Adult NF1 patients were less likely to have private insurance, be employed, and have children, but were equally likely to be married. One half of cases had disease features compromising health and well-being, and care involved 26 different specialties. Excluding neurofibromas, 43% of cases had cancer compared to 10% of controls [P < .0001, OR 5.38 (2.53-11.4)]. Only 27% of women ages 30-50 had undergone age-appropriate enhanced breast cancer surveillance. Behavioral health problems were found in 60% of NF1 patients compared to 37% of controls [P < .001, OR 2.61 (1.52-4.50)]. 93% of cases referred to a NF1 specialty center underwent a change in management upon establishing care. Conclusions: NF1 patients may benefit from coordinated management of care in a specialty center. Published by Oxford University Press 2022.
Entities:
Keywords:
burden of disease; epidemiology; neurofibromatosis type 1; quality of life; tumor predisposition
Authors: Elina Uusitalo; Jussi Leppävirta; Anna Koffert; Sakari Suominen; Jussi Vahtera; Tero Vahlberg; Minna Pöyhönen; Juha Peltonen; Sirkku Peltonen Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2014-10-29 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Patricia Z Page; Grier P Page; Emmanuel Ecosse; Bruce R Korf; Alain Leplege; Pierre Wolkenstein Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2006-09-15 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Rosalie E Ferner; Susan M Huson; Nick Thomas; Celia Moss; Harry Willshaw; D Gareth Evans; Meena Upadhyaya; Richard Towers; Michael Gleeson; Christine Steiger; Amanda Kirby Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: H A Crawford; B Barton; M J Wilson; Y Berman; V J McKelvey-Martin; P J Morrison; K N North Journal: Clin Genet Date: 2015-07-07 Impact factor: 4.438
Authors: Vanessa L Merker; Annie Dai; Heather B Radtke; Pamela Knight; Justin T Jordan; Scott R Plotkin Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Heather B Radtke; Bonita P Klein-Tasman; Vanessa L Merker; Pamela Knight; Nicole J Ullrich; Justin T Jordan; Bruce Korf; Scott R Plotkin Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 4.123
Authors: Joseph W Schaefer; Joshua M Riley; Michael Li; Dianna R Cheney-Peters; Chantel M Venkataraman; Chris J Li; Christa M Smaltz; Conor G Bradley; Crystal Y Lee; Danielle M Fitzpatrick; David B Ney; Dina S Zaret; Divya M Chalikonda; Joshua D Mairose; Kashyap Chauhan; Margaret V Szot; Robert B Jones; Rukaiya Bashir-Hamidu; Shuji Mitsuhashi; Alan A Kubey Journal: J Med Virol Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 20.693