1
|
Espinoza-Moya ME, Guertin JR, Floret A, Dorval M, Lapointe J, Chiquette J, Bouchard K, Nabi H, Laberge M. Mapping inter-professional collaboration in oncogenetics: Results from a scoping review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2024; 199:104364. [PMID: 38729319 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104364] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2024] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Inter-professional collaboration could improve timely access and quality of oncogenetic services. Here, we present the results of a scoping review conducted to systematically identify collaborative models available, unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed, synthesize evidence on their implementation and evaluation, and identify areas where additional research is needed. A comprehensive search was conducted in four journal indexing databases on June 13th, 2022, and complemented with searches of the grey literature and citations. Screening was conducted by two independent reviewers. Eligible documents included those describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of collaborative oncogenetic models. 165 publications were identified, describing 136 unique interventions/studies on oncogenetic models with somewhat overlapping collaborative features. Collaboration appears to be mostly inter-professional in nature, often taking place during risk assessment and pre-testing genetic counseling. Yet, most publications provide very limited information on their collaborative features, and only a few studies have set out to formally evaluate them. Better quality research is needed to comprehensively examine and make conclusions regarding the value of collaboration in this oncogenetics. We propose a definition, logic model, and typology of collaborative oncogenetic models to strengthen future planning, implementation, and evaluation in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria-Eugenia Espinoza-Moya
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Jason Robert Guertin
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Arthur Floret
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Michel Dorval
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Centre de Recherche CISSS Chaudière-Appalaches, 143 Rue Wolfe, Lévis, QC G6V 3Z1, Canada; Faculty of Pharmacy, Université Laval, 1050 Av de la Médecine, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Julie Lapointe
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Jocelyne Chiquette
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Centre des maladies du sein, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Karine Bouchard
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
| | - Hermann Nabi
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
| | - Maude Laberge
- Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050, Chemin Ste-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8, Canada; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Avenue de la Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada; Vitam, Centre de recherche en santé durable, Université Laval, 2525, Chemin de la Canardière, Québec, QC G1J 0A4, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Meshkani Z, Moradi N, Aboutorabi A, Farabi H, Moini N. A cost-benefit analysis of genetic screening test for breast cancer in Iran. BMC Cancer 2024; 24:279. [PMID: 38429685 PMCID: PMC10905849 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12003-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of the population- and family history (FH) -based screening for BReast CAncer (BRCA) in Iran, a country where less than 10% of breast cancer cases are attributable to a gene mutation. METHODS This was an economic evaluation study. The Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) for genetic screening test strategies in Iranian women older than 30 was calculated. To this end, the monetary value of the test was estimated using the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach using the contingent valuation method (CVM) by payment card. From a healthcare perspective, direct medical and non-medical costs were considered and a decision model for the strategies was developed to simulate the costs. A one-way sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the analysis. The data were analyzed using Excel 2010. RESULTS 660 women were included for estimating WTP and 2,176,919 women were considered in the costing model. The cost per genetic screening test for population- and FH-based strategies was $167 and $8, respectively. The monetary value of a genetic screening test was $20 and it was $27 for women with a family history or gene mutation in breast cancer. The BCR for population-based and FH-based screening strategies was 0.12 and 3.37, respectively. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS This study recommends the implementation of a FH-based strategy instead of a population-based genetic screening strategy in Iran, although a cascade genetic screening test strategy should be evaluated in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zahra Meshkani
- Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
- Health Management and Economics Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, 13833-19967, Tehran, Iran.
| | - Najmeh Moradi
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Ali Aboutorabi
- Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hiro Farabi
- Barts and The London Pragmatic Clinical Trial Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Nazi Moini
- Breast Cancer Research Centre, Motamed Cancer Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lang N, Ayme A, Ming C, Combes JD, Chappuis VN, Friedlaender A, Vuilleumier A, Sandoval JL, Viassolo V, Chappuis PO, Labidi-Galy SI. Chemotherapy-related agranulocytosis as a predictive factor for germline BRCA1 pathogenic variants in breast cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study. Swiss Med Wkly 2023; 153:40055. [PMID: 37011610 DOI: 10.57187/smw.2023.40055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Carriers of germline pathogenic variants of the BRCA1 gene (gBRCA1) tend to have a higher incidence of haematological toxicity upon exposure to chemotherapy. We hypothesised that the occurrence of agranulocytosis during the first cycle of (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy (C1) in breast cancer (BC) patients could predict gBRCA1 pathogenic variants. PATIENTS AND METHODS The study population included non-metastatic BC patients selected for genetic counselling at Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève (Jan. 1998 to Dec. 2017) with available mid-cycle blood counts performed during C1. The BOADICEA and Manchester scoring system risk-prediction models were applied. The primary outcome was the predicted likelihood of harbouring gBRCA1 pathogenic variants among patients presenting agranulocytosis during C1. RESULTS Three hundred seven BC patients were included: 32 (10.4%) gBRCA1, 27 (8.8%) gBRCA2, and 248 (81.1%) non-heterozygotes. Mean age at diagnosis was 40 years. Compared with non-heterozygotes, gBRCA1 heterozygotes more frequently had grade 3 BC (78.1%; p = 0.014), triple-negative subtype (68.8%; p <0.001), bilateral BC (25%; p = 0.004), and agranulocytosis following the first cycle of (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy (45.8%; p = 0.002). Agranulocytosis and febrile neutropenia that developed following the first cycle of chemotherapy were independently predictive for gBRCA1 pathogenic variants (odds ratio: 6.1; p = 0.002). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for agranulocytosis predicting gBRCA1 were 45.8% (25.6-67.2%), 82.8% (77.5-87.3%), 22.9% (6.1-37.3%), and 93.4% (88.9-96.4%), respectively. Agranulocytosis substantially improved the positive predictive value of the risk-prediction models used for gBRCA1 evaluation. CONCLUSION Agranulocytosis following the first cycle of (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy is an independent predictive factor for gBRCA1 detection in non-metastatic BC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noémie Lang
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Aurélie Ayme
- Department of Diagnostics, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Chang Ming
- Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Jean-Damien Combes
- Infections and Cancer Epidemiology Group, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Victor N Chappuis
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Alex Friedlaender
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Aurélie Vuilleumier
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - José L Sandoval
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Valeria Viassolo
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Pierre O Chappuis
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Diagnostics, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - S Intidhar Labidi-Galy
- Department of Oncology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Diagnostics, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Espinoza Moya ME, Guertin JR, Dorval M, Lapointe J, Bouchard K, Nabi H, Laberge M. Examining interprofessional collaboration in oncogenetic service delivery models for hereditary cancers: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e066802. [PMID: 36523215 PMCID: PMC9748975 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066802] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In a context of limited genetic specialists, collaborative models have been proposed to ensure timely access to high quality oncogenetic services for individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility. Yet, extensive variability in the terminology used and lack of a clear understanding of how interprofessional collaboration is operationalised and evaluated currently constrains the development of a robust evidence base on the value of different approaches used to optimise access to these services. To fill in this knowledge gap, this scoping review aims to systematically unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed by these interventions, and synthesise the evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews, a comprehensive literature search will be conducted to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature on collaborative models used for adult patients with, or at increased risk of, hereditary breast, ovarian, colorectal and prostate cancers. An initial search was developed for Medline, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Cochrane and Web of Science on 13 June 2022 and will be complemented by searches in Google and relevant websites. Documents describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of these interventions will be considered for inclusion. Results will be summarised descriptively and used to compare relevant model characteristics and synthesise evidence available on their implementation, effectiveness and economic impact. This process is expected to guide the development of a definition and typology of collaborative models in oncogenetics that could help strengthen the knowledge base on these interventions. Moreover, because we will be mapping the existing evidence on collaborative models in oncogenetics, the proposed review will help us identify areas where additional research might be needed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This research does not require ethics approval. Results from this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles and conferences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Eugenia Espinoza Moya
- Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Département des opérations et systèmes de décision, Faculté des sciences de l'administration, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Jason Robert Guertin
- Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Michel Dorval
- Oncology Division, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Faculty of Pharmacy, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- CISSS, Chaudière-Appalaches Research Center, Lévis, Québec, Canada
| | - Julie Lapointe
- Oncology Division, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Karine Bouchard
- Département de cancérologie, CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Hermann Nabi
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Oncology Division, Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| | - Maude Laberge
- Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Unit, Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Département des opérations et systèmes de décision, Faculté des sciences de l'administration, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
- Vitam, Centre de recherche en santé durable, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Setty BA, Wusik K, Hammill AM. How we approach genetics in the diagnosis and management of vascular anomalies. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2022; 69 Suppl 3:e29320. [PMID: 36070212 DOI: 10.1002/pbc.29320] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2021] [Revised: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 08/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Vascular anomalies are a heterogeneous group of disorders that are currently classified based on their clinical and histological characteristics. Over the past decade, there have been significant advances in molecular genetics that have led to identification of genetic alterations associated with vascular tumors, vascular malformations, and syndromes. Here, we describe known genetic alterations in vascular anomalies, discuss when and how to test, and examine how identification of causative genetic mutations provides for better management of these disorders through improved understanding of their pathogenesis and increasing use of targeted therapeutic agents in order to achieve better outcomes for our patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bhuvana A Setty
- Division of Hematology/Oncology/BMT, Nationwide Children's Hospital, and Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Katie Wusik
- Division of Human Genetics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Adrienne M Hammill
- Division of Hematology, Cancer and Blood Diseases Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, and Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Randell E, Wright M, Milosevic S, Gillespie D, Brookes-Howell L, Busse-Morris M, Hastings R, Maboshe W, Williams-Thomas R, Mills L, Romeo R, Yaziji N, McKigney AM, Ahuja A, Warren G, Glarou E, Delport S, McNamara R. Sensory integration therapy for children with autism and sensory processing difficulties: the SenITA RCT. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-140. [PMID: 35766242 DOI: 10.3310/tqge0020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Carers report unmet need for occupational therapy services addressing sensory difficulties in autism, yet insufficient evidence exists to recommend a therapeutic approach. OBJECTIVES Our aim was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sensory integration therapy for children with autism and sensory difficulties across behavioural, functional and quality-of-life outcomes. DESIGN We carried out a parallel-group randomised controlled trial, incorporating an internal pilot and a process evaluation. Randomisation utilised random permuted blocks. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Children were recruited via services and self-referral in Wales and England. Inclusion criteria were having an autism diagnosis, being in mainstream primary education and having definite/probable sensory processing difficulties. Exclusion criteria were having current/previous sensory integration therapy and current applied behaviour analysis therapy. INTERVENTION The intervention was manualised sensory integration therapy delivered over 26 weeks and the comparator was usual care. OUTCOMES The primary outcome was problem behaviours (determined using the Aberrant Behavior Checklist), including irritability/agitation, at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were adaptive behaviour, functioning and socialisation (using the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales); carer stress (measured using the Autism Parenting Stress Index); quality of life (measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions and Carer Quality of Life); functional change (according to the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure); sensory processing (determined using the Sensory Processing Measure™ at screening and at 6 months to examine mediation effects); and cost-effectiveness (assessed using the Client Service Receipt Inventory). Every effort was made to ensure that outcome assessors were blind to allocation. RESULTS A total of 138 participants were randomised (n = 69 per group). Usual care was significantly different from the intervention, which was delivered with good fidelity and adherence and minimal contamination, and was associated with no adverse effects. Trial procedures and outcome measures were acceptable. Carers and therapists reported improvement in daily functioning. The primary analysis included 106 participants. There were no significant main effects of the intervention at 6 or 12 months. The adjusted mean difference between groups on the Aberrant Behavior Checklist - irritability at 6 months post randomisation was 0.40 (95% confidence interval -2.33 to 3.14; p = 0.77). Subgroup differences in irritability/agitation at 6 months were observed for sex of child (intervention × female = 6.42, 95% confidence interval 0.00 to 12.85; p = 0.050) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (intervention × attention deficit hyperactivity disorder = -6.77, 95% confidence interval -13.55 to -0.01; p = 0.050). There was an effect on carer stress at 6 months by region (intervention × South England = 7.01, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 13.56; p = 0.04) and other neurodevelopmental/genetic conditions (intervention × neurodevelopmental/genetic condition = -9.53, 95% confidence interval -18.08 to -0.98; p = 0.030). Carer-rated goal performance and satisfaction increased across sessions (p < 0.001), with a mean change of 2.75 (95% confidence interval 2.14 to 3.37) for performance and a mean change of 3.34 (95% confidence interval 2.63 to 4.40) for satisfaction. Health economic evaluation suggests that sensory integration therapy is not cost-effective compared with usual care alone. LIMITATIONS Limitations included variability of the intervention setting (i.e. NHS vs. private), delay for some receiving therapy, an error in administration of Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales and no measurement of comparator arm goal performance. CONCLUSIONS The intervention did not demonstrate clinical benefit above standard care. Subgroup effects are hypothesis-generating only. The intervention is likely to be effective for individualised performance goals, although it is unclear whether effects were in addition to standard care or were maintained. FUTURE WORK Further investigation of subgroup effects is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered as ISRCTN14716440. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Melissa Wright
- Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Richard Hastings
- Centre for Educational Development, Appraisal, and Research (CEDAR) University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | | | | | - Laura Mills
- Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Renee Romeo
- Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Nahel Yaziji
- Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | | | - Alka Ahuja
- Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Newport, UK
| | | | - Eleni Glarou
- Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.,Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Sue Delport
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Mwale S, Farsides B. Imagining genomic medicine futures in primary care: General practitioners' views on mainstreaming genomics in the National Health Service. SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS 2021; 43:2121-2140. [PMID: 34773708 DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.13384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2020] [Revised: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 09/20/2021] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Genomic medicine has captured the imaginations of policymakers and medical scientists keen to harness its health and economic potentials. In 2012, the UK government launched the 100,000 Genomes Project to sequence the genomes of British National Health Service (NHS) patients, laying the ground for mainstreaming genomic medicine in the NHS and developing the UK's genomics industry. However, the recent research and reports from national bodies monitoring genomic medicine's roll-out suggest both ethical and practical challenges for health-care professionals. Against this backdrop, this paper, drawing on qualitative research interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and documentary analysis of policy, explores GPs' views on mainstreaming genomic medicine in the NHS and implications for their practice. Analysing the NHS's genomic medicine agenda as a 'sociotechnical imaginary', we demonstrate that whilst sociotechnical imaginaries are construed as collectively shared understandings of the future, official visions of genomic medicine diverge from those at the forefront of health-care service delivery. Whilst policy discourse evokes hope and transformation of health care, some GPs see technology in formation, an unattainable 'utopia', with no relevance to their everyday clinical practice. Finding space for genomics requires bridging the gap between 'work as imagined' at the policy level and 'work as done' in health-care delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shadreck Mwale
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Division of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Brighton, UK
| | - Bobbie Farsides
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Division of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Brighton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Carbonara N, La Forgia D, Pellegrino R, Ressa C, Tommasi S. A Cost Decision Model Supporting Treatment Strategy Selection in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers in Breast Cancer. J Pers Med 2021; 11:847. [PMID: 34575624 PMCID: PMC8470684 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11090847] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Revised: 08/21/2021] [Accepted: 08/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
In this paper, a cost decision-making model that compares the healthcare costs for diverse treatment strategies is built for BRCA-mutated women with breast cancer. Moreover, this model calculates the cancer treatment costs that could potentially be prevented, if the treatment strategy with the lowest total cost, along the entire lifetime of the patient, is chosen for high-risk women with breast cancer. The benchmark of the healthcare costs for diverse treatment strategies is selected in the presence of uncertainty, i.e., considering, throughout the lifetime of the patient, the risks and complications that may arise in each strategy and, therefore, the costs associated with the management of such events. Our results reveal a clear economic advantage of adopting the cost decision-making model for benchmarking the healthcare costs for various treatment strategies for BRCA-mutated women with breast cancer. The cost savings were higher when all breast cancer patients underwent counseling and genetic testing before deciding on any diagnostic-therapeutic path, with a probability of obtaining savings of over 75%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nunzia Carbonara
- Departments of Mechanics Mathematics and Management, Politecnico di Bari, 70126 Bari, Italy;
| | - Daniele La Forgia
- SSD Radiodiagnostica Senologica, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Tumori “Giovanni Paolo II” di Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Roberta Pellegrino
- Departments of Mechanics Mathematics and Management, Politecnico di Bari, 70126 Bari, Italy;
| | - Cosmo Ressa
- S.C. Chirurgia Plastica e Ricostruttiva, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Tumori “Giovanni Paolo II” di Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Stefania Tommasi
- SSD Diagnostica Molecolare e Farmacogenetica, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Tumori “Giovanni Paolo II” di Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Mantilla WA, Sanabria-Salas MC, Baldion AM, Sua LF, Gonzalez DM, Lema M. NGS in Lung, Breast, and Unknown Primary Cancer in Colombia: A Multidisciplinary Consensus on Challenges and Opportunities. JCO Glob Oncol 2021; 7:1012-1023. [PMID: 34185572 PMCID: PMC8457807 DOI: 10.1200/go.21.00046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2021] [Revised: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Given the benefits and likely future applications, there is an urgent need to expand the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in breast, lung, and unknown primary cancers in Colombia. The objective of this review is to address the barriers limiting access to the use of NGS in Colombia, specifically for patients with breast, lung, and unknown primary cancers in the public health care system. A selected Panel of Colombian experts in NGS were provided with a series of relevant questions to address in a multiday conference. Each narrative was discussed and edited by the Panel through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion until consensus was achieved. There are limitations to the widespread adoption of innovative technology inherent to the Colombian health care system. Barriers identified to implementing NGS in Colombia include availability, accessibility, and affordability; limited infrastructure; training and awareness of health personnel; quality-control procedures; and collection of local data. Stakeholders must align to adapt the implementation of NGS to the constraints of resource-limited environments. Diagnostic algorithms were developed to guide molecular testing for lung, breast, and unknown primary cancers. Recommendations on overcoming the barriers to the widespread adoption of NGS include country-specific molecular testing guidelines, creating a national genetic registry, improving infrastructure, and creating health policy that favors the adoption of innovative technology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ana Margarita Baldion
- Head of the Pathology Section, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Hospital Universitario Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Luz F. Sua
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Fundación Valle del Lili, and Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad ICESI, Cali, Colombia
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Stinton C, Jordan M, Fraser H, Auguste P, Court R, Al-Khudairy L, Madan J, Grammatopoulos D, Taylor-Phillips S. Testing strategies for Lynch syndrome in people with endometrial cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2021; 25:1-216. [PMID: 34169821 PMCID: PMC8273681 DOI: 10.3310/hta25420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lynch syndrome is an inherited genetic condition that is associated with an increased risk of certain cancers. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended that people with colorectal cancer are tested for Lynch syndrome. Routine testing for Lynch syndrome among people with endometrial cancer is not currently conducted. OBJECTIVES To systematically review the evidence on the test accuracy of immunohistochemistry- and microsatellite instability-based strategies to detect Lynch syndrome among people who have endometrial cancer, and the clinical effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of testing for Lynch syndrome among people who have been diagnosed with endometrial cancer. DATA SOURCES Searches were conducted in the following databases, from inception to August 2019 - MEDLINE ALL, EMBASE (both via Ovid), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (both via Wiley Online Library), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database (both via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination), Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (both via Web of Science), PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination), NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, EconPapers (Research Papers in Economics) and School of Health and Related Research Health Utilities Database. The references of included studies and relevant systematic reviews were also checked and experts on the team were consulted. REVIEW METHODS Eligible studies included people with endometrial cancer who were tested for Lynch syndrome using immunohistochemistry- and/or microsatellite instability-based testing [with or without mutL homologue 1 (MLH1) promoter hypermethylation testing], with Lynch syndrome diagnosis being established though germline testing of normal (non-tumour) tissue for constitutional mutations in mismatch repair. The risk of bias in studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool, the Consolidated Health Economic Reporting Standards and the Philips' checklist. Two reviewers independently conducted each stage of the review. A meta-analysis of test accuracy was not possible because of the number and heterogeneity of studies. A narrative summary of test accuracy results was provided, reporting test accuracy estimates and presenting forest plots. The economic model constituted a decision tree followed by Markov models for the impact of colorectal and endometrial surveillance, and aspirin prophylaxis with a lifetime time horizon. RESULTS The clinical effectiveness search identified 3308 studies; 38 studies of test accuracy were included. (No studies of clinical effectiveness of endometrial cancer surveillance met the inclusion criteria.) Four test accuracy studies compared microsatellite instability with immunohistochemistry. No clear difference in accuracy between immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability was observed. There was some evidence that specificity of immunohistochemistry could be improved with the addition of methylation testing. There was high concordance between immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability. The economic model indicated that all testing strategies, compared with no testing, were cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Immunohistochemistry with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation testing was the most cost-effective strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £9420 per quality-adjusted life-year. The second most cost-effective strategy was immunohistochemistry testing alone, but incremental analysis produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio exceeding £130,000. Results were robust across all scenario analyses. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £5690 to £20,740; only removing the benefits of colorectal cancer surveillance produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in excess of the £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. A sensitivity analysis identified the main cost drivers of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as percentage of relatives accepting counselling and prevalence of Lynch syndrome in the population. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, a 0.93 probability that immunohistochemistry with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation testing is cost-effective, compared with no testing. LIMITATIONS The systematic review excluded grey literature, studies written in non-English languages and studies for which the reference standard could not be established. Studies were included when Lynch syndrome was diagnosed by genetic confirmation of constitutional variants in the four mismatch repair genes (i.e. MLH1, mutS homologue 2, mutS homologue 6 and postmeiotic segregation increased 2). Variants of uncertain significance were reported as per the studies. There were limitations in the economic model around uncertainty in the model parameters and a lack of modelling of the potential harms of gynaecological surveillance and specific pathway modelling of genetic testing for somatic mismatch repair mutations. CONCLUSION The economic model suggests that testing women with endometrial cancer for Lynch syndrome is cost-effective, but that results should be treated with caution because of uncertain model inputs. FUTURE WORK Randomised controlled trials could provide evidence on the effect of earlier intervention on outcomes and the balance of benefits and harms of gynaecological cancer surveillance. Follow-up of negative cases through disease registers could be used to determine false negative cases. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019147185. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 42. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chris Stinton
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Mary Jordan
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Hannah Fraser
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Peter Auguste
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Rachel Court
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | | | - Jason Madan
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Dimitris Grammatopoulos
- Institute of Precision Diagnostics and Translational Medicine, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Powell CB, Laurent C, Ciaravino G, Garcia C, Han L, Hoodfar E, Karlea A, Kobelka C, Lee J, Littell RD, Roh J, Vay A, Kushi LH. Streamlining genetic testing for women with ovarian cancer in a Northern California health care system. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 159:221-228. [PMID: 32778409 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Referral to Genetics for pre-testing counseling may be inefficient for women with ovarian cancer. This study assesses feasibility of gynecologic oncologists directly offering genetic testing. METHODS A prospective pilot study was conducted at two gynecologic oncology hubs in an integrated healthcare system from May 1 to November 6, 2019. Gynecologic oncologists offered multigene panel testing to women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, followed by selective genetic counseling. Outcomes were compared between study participants and women from other hubs in the health system. RESULTS Of ovarian cancer patients at study sites, 40 participated and all underwent genetic testing. Of 101 patients diagnosed at other sites, 85% were referred to genetics (p = .0061 compared to pilot participants) and 67% completed testing (p < .0001). The time from diagnosis to blood draw and notification of result was 18.5 and 34 days for the pilot group compared to 25.5 and 53 days at other sites. Panel testing detected 9 (22.5%) and 7 (10.3%, p = .08) pathogenic mutations in each group, respectively. Patients and providers were highly satisfied with the streamlined process. CONCLUSION Genetic testing performed at the gynecologic oncology point of care for patients with ovarian cancer is feasible, increases uptake of testing, and improves time to results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Bethan Powell
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program San Francisco, United States of America.
| | - Cecile Laurent
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America
| | - Giuseppe Ciaravino
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program Oakland, United States of America
| | - Christine Garcia
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program San Francisco, United States of America
| | - Liz Han
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program Oakland, United States of America
| | - Elizabeth Hoodfar
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Genetics Department, United States of America
| | - Audrey Karlea
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Genetics Department, United States of America
| | - Christine Kobelka
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Genetics Department, United States of America
| | - Jaimie Lee
- Kaiser Permanente Oakland Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Program, United States of America
| | - Ramey D Littell
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program San Francisco, United States of America
| | - Janise Roh
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America
| | - Agniezka Vay
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program Oakland, United States of America
| | - Lawrence H Kushi
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Snowsill TM, Ryan NAJ, Crosbie EJ. Cost-Effectiveness of the Manchester Approach to Identifying Lynch Syndrome in Women with Endometrial Cancer. J Clin Med 2020; 9:E1664. [PMID: 32492863 PMCID: PMC7356917 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9061664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2020] [Revised: 05/21/2020] [Accepted: 05/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary cancer syndrome responsible for 3% of all endometrial cancer and 5% in those aged under 70 years. It is unclear whether universal testing for LS in endometrial cancer patients would be cost-effective. The Manchester approach to identifying LS in endometrial cancer patients uses immunohistochemistry (IHC) to detect mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, incorporates testing for MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, and incorporates genetic testing for pathogenic MMR variants. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Manchester approach on the basis of primary research data from clinical practice in Manchester. The Proportion of Endometrial Tumours Associated with Lynch Syndrome (PETALS) study informed estimates of diagnostic performances for a number of different strategies. A recent microcosting study was adapted and was used to estimate diagnostic costs. A Markov model was used to predict long-term costs and health outcomes (measured in quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) for individuals and their relatives. Bootstrapping and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to estimate the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness. The Manchester approach dominated other reflex testing strategies when considering diagnostic costs and Lynch syndrome cases identified. When considering long-term costs and QALYs the Manchester approach was the optimal strategy, costing £5459 per QALY gained (compared to thresholds of £20,000 to £30,000 per QALY commonly used in the National Health Service (NHS)). Cost-effectiveness is not an argument for restricting testing to younger patients or those with a strong family history. Universal testing for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer patients is expected to be cost-effective in the U.K. (NHS), and the Manchester approach is expected to be the optimal testing strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan M. Snowsill
- Health Economics Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Neil A. J. Ryan
- Division of Evolution and Genomic Medicine, University of Manchester, St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK;
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK;
- Academic Centre for Women’s Health, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK
| | - Emma J. Crosbie
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester M13 9WL, UK;
- Division of Gynaecology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Scott N, O'Sullivan J, Asgeirsson K, Macmillan D, Wilson E. Changing practice: moving to a specialist nurse-led service for BRCA gene testing. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 29:S6-S13. [DOI: 10.12968/bjon.2020.29.10.s6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
Some 5–10% of all breast cancers are associated with a pathogenic variant in a breast cancer-associated gene (BRCA1/BRCA2). Historically, with referral to the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust's clinical genetics department for genetic testing, waiting times were on average 12–14 weeks for an initial appointment and 4–6 months to obtain results from the date of testing. A specialist, nurse-led mainstreaming cancer genetics (MCG) service was set up in the trust's Nottingham Breast Institute (NBI) to: reduce waiting times for the initial consultation, counselling, consent and obtaining results for BRCA1/BRCA2 gene testing; and to ensure appropriate patients with breast cancer were offered genetic testing. Two breast clinical nurse specialists were trained so they could counsel, consent and give results for the BRCA1/BRCA2 gene testing directly to patients. Average waiting times for results from the time of testing were reduced to 35.8 days under the nurse-led service, which enabled oncologists and patients to consider individual treatment options at an earlier time. The MCG service reduced waiting times, resulting in an improved, more streamlined service for patients undergoing genetic testing. The MCG service extended the scope of practice of the breast nurse clinical specialists, embedded an expert advanced nursing role in the breast multidisciplinary team and developed nurse mentoring opportunities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola Scott
- Breast Clinical Nurse Specialist and Specialist in Breast Family History, Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
| | - Jackie O'Sullivan
- Breast Clinical Nurse Specialist and Specialist in Breast Family History, Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
| | - Kristjan Asgeirsson
- Consultant Oncoplastic Breast Surgeon, Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
| | - Douglas Macmillan
- Consultant Oncoplastic Breast Surgeon, Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
| | - Emma Wilson
- Associate Professor in Public Health, University of Nottingham
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cost-effectiveness analysis of reflex testing for Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer in the UK setting. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0221419. [PMID: 31469860 PMCID: PMC6716649 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2019] [Accepted: 08/06/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Lynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer syndrome caused by constitutional pathogenic variants in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system, leading to increased risk of colorectal, endometrial and other cancers. The study aimed to identify the incremental costs and consequences of strategies to identify Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of reflex testing strategies for identifying Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer taking the NHS perspective and a lifetime horizon. Model input parameters were sourced from various published sources. Consequences were measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000/QALY was used. Results Reflex testing for Lynch syndrome using MMR immunohistochemistry and MLH1 methylation testing was cost-effective versus no testing, costing £14 200 per QALY gained. There was uncertainty due to parameter imprecision, with an estimated 42% chance this strategy is not cost-effective compared with no testing. Age had a significant impact on cost-effectiveness, with testing not predicted to be cost-effective in patients aged 65 years and over. Conclusions Testing for Lynch syndrome in younger women with endometrial cancer using MMR immunohistochemistry and MLH1 methylation testing may be cost-effective. Age cut-offs may be controversial and adversely affect implementation.
Collapse
|
15
|
Paradiso AV, Digennaro M, Patruno M, De Summa S, Tommasi S, Berindan-Neagoe I. BRCA germline mutation test for all woman with ovarian cancer? BMC Cancer 2019; 19:641. [PMID: 31253107 PMCID: PMC6599356 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5829-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2018] [Accepted: 06/12/2019] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Delivering widespread BRCA testing to patients with ovarian cancer has been suggested by several scientists, recommended by professional societies and solicited by patients organizations. However, based on the lack of studies clearly demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of such approach compared to standard practice, we evaluated the possibility to better select subgroups of ovarian cancer (OC) patients with higher probability to be a BRCA mutation carrier’. Methods We analyzed the database of 2222 germline BRCA analyses from OC patients recently published by Song et al. (Song 2014) by applying multivariate and conditional inference regression tree-analyses. Results Overall, 178/2192 (8.1%) evaluable OC women showed pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA genes (84 BRCA1;94 BRCA2). BRCA mutations resulted significantly more frequent in Epithelial tumors (10.7%), less differentiated tumours (11.0%) and younger subjects (13.4%). Regression tree analysis permitted to individualize a subset of 66% OC patients with particularly low risk (3.5%) to carry a BRCA mutation vs a subgroup (24% of the series), with a probability higher than 17% to carry a pathogenic mutation. Younger age, OC and Breast Cancer family history were confirmed powerful factors in selecting subgroups of patients with significantly different BRCA mutation probability. Conclusions Our regression tree-analysis can represent an innovative approach taking into consideration all main clinical pathological information to select OC patients to be candidated for BRCA test.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A V Paradiso
- Experimental Oncology - Center for Study of Heredo-Familial Tumors, IRCCS-Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", viale Orazio Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy. .,Centro Studi Tumori Eredo-Familiari, Istituto Tumori G Paolo II IRCCS National Cancer Research Centre, Via O Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy.
| | - M Digennaro
- Experimental Oncology - Center for Study of Heredo-Familial Tumors, IRCCS-Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", viale Orazio Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy
| | - M Patruno
- Experimental Oncology - Center for Study of Heredo-Familial Tumors, IRCCS-Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", viale Orazio Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy
| | - S De Summa
- Molecular and Pharmacogenetics Diagnostic Laboratory, IRCCS-Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", viale Orazio Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy
| | - S Tommasi
- Molecular and Pharmacogenetics Diagnostic Laboratory, IRCCS-Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II", viale Orazio Flacco, 65, 70124, Bari, Italy
| | - I Berindan-Neagoe
- Department of Functional Genomics and Experimental Pathology, The Oncology Institute "Prof. Dr. Ion Chiricuta", University of Medicine and Pharmacy Iuliu Hatieganu- Center for Functional Genomics and Center for Advanced Medicine Medfuture, Republicii 34th street; Marinescu 23, Pasteur 4-6, 400015, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Snowsill T, Coelho H, Huxley N, Jones-Hughes T, Briscoe S, Frayling IM, Hyde C. Molecular testing for Lynch syndrome in people with colorectal cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2018; 21:1-238. [PMID: 28895526 DOI: 10.3310/hta21510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Inherited mutations in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) mismatch repair (MMR) genes lead to an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), gynaecological cancers and other cancers, known as Lynch syndrome (LS). Risk-reducing interventions can be offered to individuals with known LS-causing mutations. The mutations can be identified by comprehensive testing of the MMR genes, but this would be prohibitively expensive in the general population. Tumour-based tests - microsatellite instability (MSI) and MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) - are used in CRC patients to identify individuals at high risk of LS for genetic testing. MLH1 (MutL homologue 1) promoter methylation and BRAF V600E testing can be conducted on tumour material to rule out certain sporadic cancers. OBJECTIVES To investigate whether testing for LS in CRC patients using MSI or IHC (with or without MLH1 promoter methylation testing and BRAF V600E testing) is clinically effective (in terms of identifying Lynch syndrome and improving outcomes for patients) and represents a cost-effective use of NHS resources. REVIEW METHODS Systematic reviews were conducted of the published literature on diagnostic test accuracy studies of MSI and/or IHC testing for LS, end-to-end studies of screening for LS in CRC patients and economic evaluations of screening for LS in CRC patients. A model-based economic evaluation was conducted to extrapolate long-term outcomes from the results of the diagnostic test accuracy review. The model was extended from a model previously developed by the authors. RESULTS Ten studies were identified that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of MSI and/or IHC testing for identifying LS in CRC patients. For MSI testing, sensitivity ranged from 66.7% to 100.0% and specificity ranged from 61.1% to 92.5%. For IHC, sensitivity ranged from 80.8% to 100.0% and specificity ranged from 80.5% to 91.9%. When tumours showing low levels of MSI were treated as a positive result, the sensitivity of MSI testing increased but specificity fell. No end-to-end studies of screening for LS in CRC patients were identified. Nine economic evaluations of screening for LS in CRC were identified. None of the included studies fully matched the decision problem and hence a new economic evaluation was required. The base-case results in the economic evaluation suggest that screening for LS in CRC patients using IHC, BRAF V600E and MLH1 promoter methylation testing would be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for this strategy was £11,008 per QALY compared with no screening. Screening without tumour tests is not predicted to be cost-effective. LIMITATIONS Most of the diagnostic test accuracy studies identified were rated as having a risk of bias or were conducted in unrepresentative samples. There was no direct evidence that screening improves long-term outcomes. No probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted. CONCLUSIONS Systematic review evidence suggests that MSI- and IHC-based testing can be used to identify LS in CRC patients, although there was heterogeneity in the methods used in the studies identified and the results of the studies. There was no high-quality empirical evidence that screening improves long-term outcomes and so an evidence linkage approach using modelling was necessary. Key determinants of whether or not screening is cost-effective are the accuracy of tumour-based tests, CRC risk without surveillance, the number of relatives identified for cascade testing, colonoscopic surveillance effectiveness and the acceptance of genetic testing. Future work should investigate screening for more causes of hereditary CRC and screening for LS in endometrial cancer patients. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016033879. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Nicola Huxley
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tracey Jones-Hughes
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Simon Briscoe
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Ian M Frayling
- Institute of Cancer and Genetics, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Colombo N, Huang G, Scambia G, Chalas E, Pignata S, Fiorica J, Van Le L, Ghamande S, González-Santiago S, Bover I, Graña Suárez B, Green A, Huot-Marchand P, Bourhis Y, Karve S, Blakeley C. Evaluation of a Streamlined Oncologist-Led BRCA Mutation Testing and Counseling Model for Patients With Ovarian Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36:1300-1307. [PMID: 29558274 PMCID: PMC6804908 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.76.2781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose There is a growing demand for BRCA1/ 2 mutation ( BRCAm) testing in patients with ovarian cancer; however, the limited number of genetic counselors presents a potential barrier. To facilitate more widespread BRCAm testing in ovarian cancer, pretest counseling by the oncology team could shorten testing turnaround times and ease the pressure on genetic counselors. Patients and Methods The prospective, observational Evaluating a Streamlined Onco-genetic BRCA Testing and Counseling Model Among Patients With Ovarian Cancer (ENGAGE) study evaluated a streamlined, oncologist-led BRCAm testing pathway. The analysis population comprised 700 patients with ovarian cancer at 26 sites in the United States, Italy, and Spain. The primary objectives were to assess turnaround time and, using questionnaires, to evaluate stakeholder satisfaction (patients, oncologists, and geneticists or genetic counselors) with the oncologist-led BRCAm testing pathway. Results The median overall turnaround time was 9.1 weeks (range, 0.9 to 37.1 weeks), with median turnaround times in the United States, Italy, and Spain of 4.1 weeks (range, 0.9 to 37.1 weeks), 20.4 weeks (range, 2.9 to 35.4 weeks), and 12.0 weeks (range, 2.0 to 36.7 weeks), respectively. Patient satisfaction with the oncologist-led BRCAm testing pathway was high, with > 99% of patients expressing satisfaction with pre- and post- BRCAm test counseling. Oncologist satisfaction with the BRCAm testing pathway was also high, with > 80% agreeing that the process for performing BRCAm testing worked well and that counseling patients on BRCAm testing was an efficient use of their time. Oncologists expressed higher levels of satisfaction with the BRCAm testing pathway than did geneticists or genetic counselors. Conclusion The results of the ENGAGE study demonstrate that an oncologist-led BRCAm testing process is feasible in ovarian cancer. Development of local BRCAm testing guidelines similar to the one used in this study could allow faster treatment decisions and better use of resources in the management of patients with ovarian cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicoletta Colombo
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Gloria Huang
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Eva Chalas
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Sandro Pignata
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - James Fiorica
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Linda Van Le
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Sharad Ghamande
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Santiago González-Santiago
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Isabel Bover
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Begoña Graña Suárez
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew Green
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Philippe Huot-Marchand
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Yann Bourhis
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Sudeep Karve
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Christopher Blakeley
- Nicoletta Colombo, University of Milan-Bicocca; Nicoletta Colombo, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milan; Giovanni Scambia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome; Sandro Pignata, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori Fondazione G Pascale IRCCS, Naples, Italy; Gloria Huang, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx; Eva Chalas, Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY; James Fiorica, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, FL; Linda Van Le, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC; Sharad Ghamande, The Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, Augusta; Andrew Green, Northeast Georgia Medical Center, Gainesville, GA; Santiago González-Santiago, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres; Isabel Bover, Hospital Son Llàtzer, Palma; Begoña Graña Suárez, University Hospital A Coruña, Sergas, Spain; Philippe Huot-Marchand and Yann Bourhis, Mapi Real World Evidence, Lyon, France; Sudeep Karve, AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD; and Christopher Blakeley, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Alves ITS, Condinho M, Custódio S, Pereira BF, Fernandes R, Gonçalves V, da Costa PJ, Lacerda R, Marques AR, Martins-Dias P, Nogueira GR, Neves AR, Pinho P, Rodrigues R, Rolo E, Silva J, Travessa A, Leite RP, Sousa A, Romão L. Genetics of personalized medicine: cancer and rare diseases. Cell Oncol (Dordr) 2018; 41:335-341. [PMID: 29633150 DOI: 10.1007/s13402-018-0379-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/21/2018] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The 21st annual meeting of the Portuguese Society of Human Genetics (SPGH), organized by Luísa Romão, Ana Sousa and Rosário Pinto Leite, was held in Caparica, Portugal, from the 16th to the 18th of November 2017. Having entered an era in which personalized medicine is emerging as a paradigm for disease diagnosis, treatment and prevention, the program of this meeting intended to include lectures by leading national and international scientists presenting exceptional findings on the genetics of personalized medicine. Various topics were discussed, including cancer genetics, transcriptome dynamics and novel therapeutics for cancers and rare disorders that are designed to specifically target molecular alterations in individual patients. Several panel discussions were held to emphasize (ethical) issues associated with personalized medicine, including genetic cancer counseling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inês Teles Siefers Alves
- Department of Cell Biology and Biochemistry, Springer Science + Business Media B.V, Van Godewijckstraat 30, 3311, GX, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Manuel Condinho
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Sónia Custódio
- Medical Genetics Service, Pediatric Department, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Bruna F Pereira
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Rafael Fernandes
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Vânia Gonçalves
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Paulo J da Costa
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Rafaela Lacerda
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Ana Rita Marques
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Patrícia Martins-Dias
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Gonçalo R Nogueira
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Ana Rita Neves
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Patrícia Pinho
- Genetics Laboratory, Hospital Center of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal
| | - Raquel Rodrigues
- Medical Genetics Service, Pediatric Department, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Eva Rolo
- Medical Genetics Service, Pediatric Department, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Joana Silva
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - André Travessa
- Medical Genetics Service, Pediatric Department, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Rosário Pinto Leite
- Genetics Laboratory, Hospital Center of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal
| | - Ana Sousa
- Medical Genetics Service, Pediatric Department, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Luísa Romão
- Department of Human Genetics, National Institute of Health Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal
- Biosystems & Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Faculty of Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Heramb C, Wangensteen T, Grindedal EM, Ariansen SL, Lothe S, Heimdal KR, Mæhle L. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation spectrum - an update on mutation distribution in a large cancer genetics clinic in Norway. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2018; 16:3. [PMID: 29339979 PMCID: PMC5761139 DOI: 10.1186/s13053-017-0085-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2017] [Accepted: 12/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Founder mutations in the two breast cancer genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, have been described in many populations, among these are Ashkenazi-Jewish, Polish, Norwegian and Icelandic. Founder mutation testing in patients with relevant ancestry has been a cost-efficient approach in such populations. Four Norwegian BRCA1 founder mutations were defined by haplotyping in 2001, and accounted for 68% of BRCA1 mutation carriers at the time. After 15 more years of genetic testing, updated knowledge on the mutation spectrum of both BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Norway is needed. In this study, we aim at describing the mutation spectrum and frequencies in the BRCA1/2 carrier population of the largest clinic of hereditary cancer in Norway. Methods A total of 2430 BRCA1 carriers from 669 different families, and 1092 BRCA2 carriers from 312 different families were included in a quality of care study. All variants were evaluated regarding pathogenicity following ACMG/ENIGMA criteria. The variants were assessed in AlaMut and supplementary databases to determine whether they were known to be founder mutations in other populations. Results There were 120 different BRCA1 and 87 different BRCA2 variants among the mutation carriers. Forty-six per cent of the registered BRCA1/2 families (454/981) had a previously reported Norwegian founder mutation. The majority of BRCA1/2 mutations (71%) were rare, each found in only one or two families. Fifteen per cent of BRCA1 families and 25% of BRCA2 families had one of these rare variants. The four well-known Norwegian BRCA1 founder mutations previously confirmed through haplotyping were still the four most frequent mutations in BRCA1 carriers, but the proportion of BRCA1 mutation carriers accounted for by these mutations had fallen from 68 to 52%, and hence the founder effect was weaker than previously described. Conclusions The spectrum of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in the carrier population at Norway’s largest cancer genetics clinic is diverse, and with a weaker founder effect than previously described. As a consequence, retesting the families that previously have been tested with specific tests/founder mutation tests should be a prioritised strategy to find more mutation positive families and possibly prevent cancer in healthy relatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cecilie Heramb
- Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Women's Health, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | | | | - Sheba Lothe
- Department of Medical Genetics, MSc Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Lovise Mæhle
- Department of Medical Genetics, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Abdolahi HM, Asiabar AS, Azami-Aghdash S, Pournaghi-Azar F, Rezapour A. Cost-effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Treatment Methods: Mapping of Systematic Reviews. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 2018; 5:57-67. [PMID: 29379836 PMCID: PMC5763442 DOI: 10.4103/apjon.apjon_50_17] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2017] [Accepted: 08/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Due to extensive literature on colorectal cancer and their heterogeneous results, this study aimed to summarize the systematic reviews which review the cost-effectiveness studies on different aspects of colorectal cancer. METHODS The required data were collected by searching the following key words according to MeSH: "colorectal cancer," "colorectal oncology," "colorectal carcinoma," "colorectal neoplasm," "colorectal tumors," "cost-effectiveness," "systematic review," and "meta-analysis." The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers evaluated the articles according to the checklist of "assessment of multiple systematic reviews" (AMSTAR) tool. RESULTS Finally, eight systematic reviews were included in the study. The Drummond checklist was mostly used for assessing the quality of the articles. The main perspective was related to the payer and the least was relevant to the social. The majority of the cases referred to sensitivity analysis (in 76% of the cases) and the lowest point also was allocated to discounting (in 37% of cases). The Markov model was used most widely in the studies. Treatment methods examined in the studies were not cost-effective in comparison with the studied units. Among the screening methods, computerized tomographic colonography and fecal DNA were cost-effective. The average score of the articles' qualities was high (9.8 out of 11). CONCLUSIONS The community perspective should be taken into consideration at large in the studies. It is necessary to pay more attention to discounting subject in studies. More frequent application of the Markov model is recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hossein Mashhadi Abdolahi
- Tabriz Health Services Management Research Centre, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Ali Sarabi Asiabar
- Health Management and Economics Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Saber Azami-Aghdash
- Road Traffic Injury Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Fatemeh Pournaghi-Azar
- Dental and Periodental Research Centre, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
| | - Aziz Rezapour
- Health Management and Economics Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Nag S, Sinukumar S, Hegde S. Germline Testing for Predisposition to Breast/Ovarian Cancer Should Only be Offered to Selected Patients with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. INDIAN JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY 2017. [DOI: 10.1007/s40944-017-0150-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
22
|
Abstract
Background Identification of BRCA mutations in breast cancer (BC) patients influences treatment and survival and may be of importance for their relatives. Testing is often restricted to women fulfilling high-risk criteria. However, there is limited knowledge of the sensitivity of such a strategy, and of the clinical aspects of BC caused by BRCA mutations in less selected BC cohorts. The aim of this report was to address these issues by evaluating the results of BRCA testing of BC patients in South-Eastern Norway. Methods 1371 newly diagnosed BC patients were tested with sequencing and Multi Ligation Probe Amplification (MLPA). Prevalence of mutations was calculated, and BC characteristics among carriers and non-carriers compared. Sensitivity and specificity of common guidelines for BRCA testing to identify carriers was analyzed. Number of identified female mutation positive relatives was evaluated. Results A pathogenic BRCA mutation was identified in 3.1%. Carriers differed from non-carriers in terms of age at diagnosis, family history, grade, ER/PR-status, triple negativity (TNBC) and Ki67, but not in HER2 and TNM status. One mutation positive female relative was identified per mutation positive BC patient. Using age of onset below 40 or TNBC as criteria for testing identified 32-34% of carriers. Common guidelines for testing identified 45-90%, and testing all below 60 years identified 90%. Thirty-seven percent of carriers had a family history of cancer that would have qualified for predictive BRCA testing. A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) was identified in 4.9%. Conclusions Mutation positive BC patients differed as a group from mutation negative. However, the commonly used guidelines for testing were insufficient to detect all mutation carriers in the BC cohort. Thirty-seven percent had a family history of cancer that would have qualified for predictive testing before they were diagnosed with BC. Based on our combined observations, we suggest it is time to discuss whether all BC patients should be offered BRCA testing, both to optimize treatment and improve survival for these women, but also to enable identification of healthy mutation carriers within their families. Health services need to be aware of referral possibility for healthy women with cancer in their family. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3422-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
23
|
Delivering widespread BRCA testing and PARP inhibition to patients with ovarian cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2016; 14:284-296. [PMID: 27958297 DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 112] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
The treatment of patients with ovarian cancer is rapidly changing following the success of poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in clinical trials. Olaparib is the first PARP inhibitor to be approved by the EMA and FDA for BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer. Germ line BRCA mutation status is now established as a predictive biomarker of potential benefit from treatment with a PARP inhibitor; therefore, knowledge of the BRCA status of an individual patient with ovarian cancer is essential, in order to guide treatment decisions. BRCA testing was previously offered only to women with a family or personal history of breast and/or ovarian cancer; however, almost 20% of women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer are now recognized to harbour a germ line BRCA mutation, and of these, >40% might not have a family history of cancer and would not have received BRCA testing. A strategy to enable more widespread implementation of BRCA testing in routine care is, therefore, necessary. In this Review, we summarize data from key clinical trials of PARP inhibitors and discuss how to integrate these agents into the current treatment landscape of ovarian cancer. The validity of germ line BRCA testing and other promising biomarkers of homologous-recombination deficiency will also be discussed.
Collapse
|
24
|
The cost of molecular-guided therapy in oncology: a prospective cost study alongside the MOSCATO trial. Genet Med 2016; 19:683-690. [DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2016] [Accepted: 09/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
|
25
|
Implementing rapid, robust, cost-effective, patient-centred, routine genetic testing in ovarian cancer patients. Sci Rep 2016; 6:29506. [PMID: 27406733 PMCID: PMC4942815 DOI: 10.1038/srep29506] [Citation(s) in RCA: 159] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2016] [Accepted: 06/17/2016] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Advances in DNA sequencing have made genetic testing fast and affordable, but limitations of testing processes are impeding realisation of patient benefits. Ovarian cancer exemplifies the potential value of genetic testing and the shortcomings of current pathways to access testing. Approximately 15% of ovarian cancer patients have a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation which has substantial implications for their personal management and that of their relatives. Unfortunately, in most countries, routine implementation of BRCA testing for ovarian cancer patients has been inconsistent and largely unsuccessful. We developed a rapid, robust, mainstream genetic testing pathway in which testing is undertaken by the trained cancer team with cascade testing to relatives performed by the genetics team. 207 women with ovarian cancer were offered testing through the mainstream pathway. All accepted. 33 (16%) had a BRCA mutation. The result informed management of 79% (121/154) women with active disease. Patient and clinician feedback was very positive. The pathway offers a 4-fold reduction in time and 13-fold reduction in resource requirement compared to the conventional testing pathway. The mainstream genetic testing pathway we present is effective, efficient and patient-centred. It can deliver rapid, robust, large-scale, cost-effective genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 and may serve as an exemplar for other genes and other diseases.
Collapse
|