Cost-effectiveness of surveillance programs for families at high and moderate risk of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer

A review of the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing for germline variants in familial cancer

BACKGROUND

Targeted germline testing is recommended for those with or at risk of breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer. The affordability of genetic sequencing has improved over the past decade, therefore the cost-effectiveness of testing for these cancers is worthy of reassessment.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review economic evaluations on cost-effectiveness of germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A search of PubMed and Embase databases for cost-effectiveness studies on germline testing in breast, ovarian, or colorectal cancer, published between 1999 and May 2022. Synthesis of methodology, cost-effectiveness, and reporting (CHEERS checklist) was performed.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; in 2021-adjusted US$) for germline testing versus the standard care option in hereditary breast or ovarian cancer (HBOC) across target settings were as follows: (1) population-wide testing: 344-2.5 million/QALY; (2) women with high-risk: dominant = 78,118/QALY, 8,337-59,708/LYG; (3) existing breast or ovarian cancer: 3,012-72,566/QALY, 39,835/LYG; and (4) metastatic breast cancer: 158,630/QALY. Likewise, ICERs of germline testing for colorectal cancer across settings were: (1) population-wide testing: 132,200/QALY, 1.1 million/LYG; (2) people with high-risk: 32,322-76,750/QALY, dominant = 353/LYG; and (3) patients with existing colorectal cancer: dominant = 54,122/QALY, 98,790-6.3 million/LYG. Key areas of underreporting were the inclusion of a health economic analysis plan (100% of HBOC and colorectal studies), engagement of patients and stakeholders (95.4% of HBOC, 100% of colorectal studies) and measurement of outcomes (18.2% HBOC, 38.9% of colorectal studies).

CONCLUSION

Germline testing for HBOC was likely to be cost-effective across most settings, except when used as a co-dependent technology with the PARP inhibitor, olaparib in metastatic breast cancer. In colorectal cancer studies, testing was cost-effective in those with high-risk, but inconclusive in other settings. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the prevalence of tested variants, cost of testing, uptake, and benefits of prophylactic measures. Policy advice on germline testing should emphasize the importance of these factors in their recommendations.

Cancer surveillance for patients with Li-Fraumeni Syndrome in Brazil: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

In Brazil, there is a higher prevalence of Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (LFS) compared to worldwide, due to the founder mutation in the TP53 gene p.R337H. However, a large portion of the population, that depends on National Health Care System, does not have access to effective screening through the Toronto Protocol guidelines that enables early diagnosis and improves overall survival. Population strategies for early cancer detection recommended in Brazil are limited and additional screening is not offered to patients at a high risk, leading to late diagnoses and higher cancer mortality. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing annual screening that follows the Toronto Protocol for patients diagnosed with LFS in Brazil.

Methods

A Markov decision analytic model was developed to estimate cost-effectiveness of 1,000 LFS carriers under surveillance and non-surveillance strategies over a patient's lifetime. The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per additional life year gained, comparing surveillance and non-surveillance strategies in p.R337H TP53 carriers.

Findings

For females, the model showed a mean cost of $2,222 and $14,640 and yielded 22 and 26·2 life years for non-surveillance and surveillance strategies, respectively. The ICER for early cancer surveillance versus no surveillance was $2,982 per additional life year gained. For males, the model predicts mean lifetime costs of $1,165 and $12,883 and average life years of 23·5 and 26·3 for non-surveillance and surveillance strategies, respectively. This amounts to an ICER of $ 4,185 per additional life year. Surveillance had 64% and 45% probabilities of being the most cost-effective strategy for early cancer detection in female and male carriers, respectively.

Interpretation

The adoption of surveillance for patients diagnosed with LFS by the Brazilian National Health Care System is cost-beneficial for both males and females.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative colorectal cancer screening strategies in high-risk individuals

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current guidelines recommend colonoscopy every 3-5 years for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening of individuals with a familial history of CRC. The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of screening alternatives in this population.

METHODS

Eight screening strategies were compared with no screening: fecal immunochemical test (FIT), Stool DNA and blood-based screening every 2 years, colonoscopy, computed tomography colonography, colon capsules, and sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, and colonoscopy at 45 years followed, if negative, by FIT every 2 years. Screening test and procedures performance were obtained from the literature. A microsimulation model reproducing the natural history of CRC was used to estimate the cost (€2018) and effectiveness [quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] of each strategy. A lifetime horizon was used. Costs and effectiveness were discounted at 3.5% annually.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy at a 30% uptake were the most effective strategy (46.3 and 43.9 QALY/1000). FIT at a 30 µg/g threshold with 30% uptake was only half as effective (25.7 QALY). Colonoscopy was associated with a cost of €484,000 per 1000 individuals whereas sigmoidoscopy and FIT were associated with much lower costs (€123,610 and €66,860). Incremental cost-effectiveness rate for FIT and sigmoidoscopy were €2600/QALY (versus no screening) and €3100/QALY (versus FIT), respectively, whereas it was €150,000/QALY for colonoscopy (versus sigmoidoscopy). With a lower threshold (10 µg/g) and a higher uptake of 45%, FIT was more effective and less costly than colonoscopy at a 30% uptake and was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €4240/QALY versus no screening.

CONCLUSION

At 30% uptake, current screening is the most effective screening strategy for high-risk individuals but is associated with a high ICER. Sigmoidoscopy and FIT at lower thresholds (10 µg/g) and a higher uptake should be given consideration as cost-effective alternatives.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Cost-effectiveness analysis of colorectal cancer screening strategies in high-risk individuals Fecal occult blood testing with an immunochemical test (FIT) is generally considered as the most cost-effective alternative in colorectal cancer screening programs for average risk individuals without family history.Current screening guidelines for high-risk individuals with familial history recommend colonoscopy every 3-5 years.Colonoscopy every 3-5 years for individuals with familial history is the most effective strategy but is associated with a high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.Compared with colonoscopy, if screening based on FIT is associated with a higher participation rate, it can achieve a similar effectiveness at a lower cost.

Cost-effectiveness of early cancer surveillance for patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Patients with germline TP53 pathogenic variants (Li-Fraumeni syndrome [LFS]) are at extremely high lifetime risk of developing cancer. Recent data suggest that tumor surveillance for patients with LFS may improve survival through early cancer detection. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a cancer surveillance strategy for patients with LFS compared with those whose tumors present clinically.

METHODS

A Markov decision analytic model was developed from a third-party payer perspective to estimate cost-effectiveness of routine cancer surveillance over a patient's lifetime. The model consisted of four possible health states: no cancer, cancer, post-cancer survivorship, and death. Model outcomes were costs (2015 United States Dollars [USD]), effectiveness (life years [LY] gained), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; change in cost/LY gained). One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses examined parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

The model showed a mean cost of $46 496 and $117 102 and yielded 23 and 27 LY for the nonsurveillance and surveillance strategies, respectively. The ICER for early cancer surveillance versus no surveillance was $17 125 per additional LY gained. At the commonly accepted willingness to pay threshold of $100 000/life-year gained, surveillance had a 98% probability of being the most cost-effective strategy for early cancer detection in this high-risk population.

CONCLUSIONS

Presymptomatic cancer surveillance is cost-effective for patients with germline pathogenic variants in TP53. Lack of insurance coverage or reimbursement in this population may have significant consequences and leads to undetected cancers presenting in later stages of disease with worse clinical outcomes.

Lack of association between screening interval and cancer stage in Lynch syndrome may be accounted for by over-diagnosis; a prospective Lynch syndrome database report

Background

Recent epidemiological evidence shows that colorectal cancer (CRC) continues to occur in carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair (path_MMR) variants despite frequent colonoscopy surveillance in expert centres. This observation conflicts with the paradigm that removal of all visible polyps should prevent the vast majority of CRC in path_MMR carriers, provided the screening interval is sufficiently short and colonoscopic practice is optimal.

Methods

To inform the debate, we examined, in the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD), whether the time since last colonoscopy was associated with the pathological stage at which CRC was diagnosed during prospective surveillance. Path_MMR carriers were recruited for prospective surveillance by colonoscopy. Only variants scored by the InSiGHT Variant Interpretation Committee as class 4 and 5 (clinically actionable) were included. CRCs detected at the first planned colonoscopy, or within one year of this, were excluded as prevalent cancers.

Results

Stage at diagnosis and interval between last prospective surveillance colonoscopy and diagnosis were available for 209 patients with 218 CRCs, including 162 path_MLH1, 45 path_MSH2, 10 path_MSH6 and 1 path_PMS2 carriers. The numbers of cancers detected within < 1.5, 1.5–2.5, 2.5–3.5 and at > 3.5 years since last colonoscopy were 36, 93, 56 and 33, respectively. Among these, 16.7, 19.4, 9.9 and 15.1% were stage III–IV, respectively (p = 0.34). The cancers detected more than 2.5 years after the last colonoscopy were not more advanced than those diagnosed earlier (p = 0.14).

Conclusions

The CRC stage and interval since last colonoscopy were not correlated, which is in conflict with the accelerated adenoma-carcinoma paradigm. We have previously reported that more frequent colonoscopy is not associated with lower incidence of CRC in path_MMR carriers as was expected. In contrast, point estimates showed a higher incidence with shorter intervals between examinations, a situation that may parallel to over-diagnosis in breast cancer screening. Our findings raise the possibility that some CRCs in path_MMR carriers may spontaneously disappear: the host immune response may not only remove CRC precursor lesions in path_MMR carriers, but may remove infiltrating cancers as well. If confirmed, our suggested interpretation will have a bearing on surveillance policy for path_MMR carriers.

Which Lynch syndrome screening programs could be implemented in the "real world"? A systematic review of economic evaluations

Purpose

Lynch syndrome (LS) screening can significantly reduce cancer morbidity and mortality in mutation carriers. Our aim was to identify cost-effective LS screening programs that can be implemented in the “real world.”

Methods

We performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations of genetic screening for LS in different target populations; health outcomes were estimated in life-years gained or quality-adjusted life-years.

Results

Overall, 20 studies were included in the systematic review. Based on the study populations, we identified six categories of LS screening program: colorectal cancer (CRC)–based, endometrial cancer–based, general population–based, LS family registry–based, cascade testing–based, and genetics clinic–based screening programs. We performed an in-depth analysis of CRC-based LS programs, classifying them into three additional subcategories: universal, age-targeted, and selective. In five studies, universal programs based on immunohistochemistry, either alone or in combination with the BRAF test, were cost-effective compared with no screening, while in two studies age-targeted programs with a cutoff of 70 years were cost-effective when compared with age-targeted programs with lower age thresholds.

Conclusion

Universal or <70 years–age-targeted CRC-based LS screening programs are cost-effective and should be implemented in the “real world.”

Colorectal cancer incidence in path_MLH1 carriers subjected to different follow-up protocols: a Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database report

Background

We have previously reported a high incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) in carriers of pathogenic MLH1 variants (path_MLH1) despite follow-up with colonoscopy including polypectomy.

Methods

The cohort included Finnish carriers enrolled in 3-yearly colonoscopy (n = 505; 4625 observation years) and carriers from other countries enrolled in colonoscopy 2-yearly or more frequently (n = 439; 3299 observation years). We examined whether the longer interval between colonoscopies in Finland could explain the high incidence of CRC and whether disease expression correlated with differences in population CRC incidence.

Results

Cumulative CRC incidences in carriers of path_MLH1 at 70-years of age were 41% for males and 36% for females in the Finnish series and 58% and 55% in the non-Finnish series, respectively (p > 0.05). Mean time from last colonoscopy to CRC was 32.7 months in the Finnish compared to 31.0 months in the non-Finnish (p > 0.05) and was therefore unaffected by the recommended colonoscopy interval. Differences in population incidence of CRC could not explain the lower point estimates for CRC in the Finnish series. Ten-year overall survival after CRC was similar for the Finnish and non-Finnish series (88% and 91%, respectively; p > 0.05).

Conclusions

The hypothesis that the high incidence of CRC in path_MLH1 carriers was caused by a higher incidence in the Finnish series was not valid. We discuss whether the results were influenced by methodological shortcomings in our study or whether the assumption that a shorter interval between colonoscopies leads to a lower CRC incidence may be wrong. This second possibility is intriguing, because it suggests the dogma that CRC in path_MLH1 carriers develops from polyps that can be detected at colonoscopy and removed to prevent CRC may be erroneous. In view of the excellent 10-year overall survival in the Finnish and non-Finnish series we remain strong advocates of current surveillance practices for those with LS pending studies that will inform new recommendations on the best surveillance interval.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13053-017-0078-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Colonoscopic surveillance - a cost-effective method to prevent hereditary and familial colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 20-30% of all colorectal cancer (CRC) cases may have a familial contribution. The family history of CRC can be prominent (e.g., hereditary colorectal cancer (HCRC)) or more moderate (e.g., familial colorectal cancer (FCRC)). For family members at risk, colonoscopic surveillance is a well-established method to prevent both HCRC and FCRC, although the evidence for the exact procedures of the surveillance is limited. Surveillance can come at a high price if individuals are frequently examined, as this may result in unnecessary colonoscopies in relation to actual risk for CRC. This study analyses the cost-effectiveness of a surveillance programme implemented in the Northern Sweden Health Care Region.

METHODS

The study includes 259 individuals prospectively recorded in the colonoscopic surveillance programme registry at the Cancer Prevention Clinic, Umeå University Hospital. We performed a cost-utility analysis with a contrafactual design: we compared observed costs and loss of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) due to CRC with the surveillance programme to an expected outcome without surveillance. The main measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between surveillance and non-surveillance. Scenario analysis was used to explore uncertainty.

RESULTS

The ICER between surveillance and non-surveillance in the base model was 3596€/QALY. The ICER varied from -4620€ in the best-case scenario to 33,779€ in the worst-case scenario.

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopic surveillance is a very cost-effective method to prevent HCRC and FCRC compared to current thresholds for cost-effectiveness and other cancer preventive interventions.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of diagnostic strategies for Lynch syndrome

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited autosomal dominant disorder characterised by an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and other cancers, and caused by mutations in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) mismatch repair genes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify LS in newly diagnosed early-onset CRC patients (aged < 50 years). Cascade testing of relatives is employed in all strategies for individuals in whom LS is identified.

DATA SOURCES AND METHODS

Systematic reviews were conducted of the test accuracy of microsatellite instability (MSI) testing or immunohistochemistry (IHC) in individuals with CRC at risk of LS, and of economic evidence relating to diagnostic strategies for LS. Reviews were carried out in April 2012 (test accuracy); and in February 2012, repeated in February 2013 (economic evaluations). Databases searched included MEDLINE (1946 to April week 3, 2012), EMBASE (1980 to week 17, 2012) and Web of Science (inception to 30 April 2012), and risk of bias for test accuracy was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) quality appraisal tool. A de novo economic model of diagnostic strategies for LS was developed.

RESULTS

Inconsistencies in study designs precluded pooling of diagnostic test accuracy results from a previous systematic review and nine subsequent primary studies. These were of mixed quality, with significant methodological concerns identified for most. IHC and MSI can both play a part in diagnosing LS but neither is gold standard. No UK studies evaluated the cost-effectiveness of diagnosing and managing LS, although studies from other countries generally found some strategies to be cost-effective compared with no testing. The de novo model demonstrated that all strategies were cost-effective compared with no testing at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with the most cost-effective strategy utilising MSI and BRAF testing [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) = £5491 per QALY]. The maximum health benefit to the population of interest would be obtained using universal germline testing, but this would not be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with the next best strategy. When the age limit was raised from 50 to 60 and 70 years, the ICERs compared with no testing increased but remained below £20,000 per QALY (except for universal germline testing with an age limit of 70 years). The total net health benefit increased with the age limit as more individuals with LS were identified. Uncertainty was evaluated through univariate sensitivity analyses, which suggested that the parameters substantially affecting cost-effectiveness: were the risk of CRC for individuals with LS; the average number of relatives identified per index patient; the effectiveness of colonoscopy in preventing metachronous CRC; the cost of colonoscopy; the duration of the psychological impact of genetic testing on health-related quality of life (HRQoL); and the impact of prophylactic hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy on HRQoL (this had the potential to make all testing strategies more expensive and less effective than no testing).

LIMITATIONS

The absence of high-quality data for the impact of prophylactic gynaecological surgery and the psychological impact of genetic testing on HRQoL is an acknowledged limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that reflex testing for LS in newly diagnosed CRC patients aged < 50 years is cost-effective. Such testing may also be cost-effective in newly diagnosed CRC patients aged < 60 or < 70 years. Results are subject to uncertainty due to a number of parameters, for some of which good estimates were not identified. We recommend future research to estimate the cost-effectiveness of testing for LS in individuals with newly diagnosed endometrial or ovarian cancer, and the inclusion of aspirin chemoprevention. Further research is required to accurately estimate the impact of interventions on HRQoL.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002436.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Economic evidence on identifying clinically actionable findings with whole-genome sequencing: a scoping review

The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommends that mutations in 56 genes for 24 conditions are clinically actionable and should be reported as secondary findings after whole-genome sequencing (WGS). Our aim was to identify published economic evaluations of detecting mutations in these genes among the general population or among targeted/high-risk populations and conditions and identify gaps in knowledge. A targeted PubMed search from 1994 through November 2014 was performed, and we included original, English-language articles reporting cost-effectiveness or a cost-to-utility ratio or net benefits/benefit-cost focused on screening (not treatment) for conditions and genes listed by the ACMG. Articles were screened, classified as targeting a high-risk or general population, and abstracted by two reviewers. General population studies were evaluated for actual cost-effectiveness measures (e.g., incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER)), whereas studies of targeted populations were evaluated for whether at least one scenario proposed was cost-effective (e.g., ICER of ≤$100,000 per life-year or quality-adjusted life-year gained). A total of 607 studies were identified, and 32 relevant studies were included. Identified studies addressed fewer than one-third (7 of 24; 29%) of the ACMG conditions. The cost-effectiveness of screening in the general population was examined for only 2 of 24 conditions (8%). The cost-effectiveness of most genetic findings that the ACMG recommends for return has not been evaluated in economic studies or in the context of screening in the general population. The individual studies do not directly address the cost-effectiveness of WGS.

Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?

Emerging results indicate that screening improves survival of patients with colorectal cancer. Therefore, screening programs are already implemented or are being considered for implementation in Asia, Europe and North America. At present, a great variety of screening methods are available including colono- and sigmoidoscopy, CT- and MR-colonography, capsule endoscopy, DNA and occult blood in feces, and so on. The pros and cons of the various tests, including economic issues, are debated. Although a plethora of evaluated and validated tests even with high specificities and reasonable sensitivities are available, an international consensus on screening procedures is still not established. The rather limited compliance in present screening procedures is a significant drawback. Furthermore, some of the procedures are costly and, therefore, selection methods for these procedures are needed. Current research into improvements of screening for colorectal cancer includes blood-based biological markers, such as proteins, DNA and RNA in combination with various demographically and clinically parameters into a "risk assessment evaluation" (RAE) test. It is assumed that such a test may lead to higher acceptance among the screening populations, and thereby improve the compliances. Furthermore, the involvement of the media, including social media, may add even more individuals to the screening programs. Implementation of validated RAE and progressively improved screening methods may reform the cost/benefit of screening procedures for colorectal cancer. Therefore, results of present research, validating RAE tests, are awaited with interest.

A systematic review of gynecological cancer surveillance in women belonging to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) families

OBJECTIVE/DESIGN

We performed a systematic review of studies that evaluate the role of gynecological cancer surveillance in women who carry a hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) mutation or belong to a family that fulfills the criteria for HNPCC.

METHODS

The PubMed database and a clinical trials database were used to identify relevant studies. We included studies that reported results of gynecological cancer surveillance in women who carry a HNPCC mutation, belong to a family in which a HNPCC mutation was detected or belong to a family fulfilling the Amsterdam II criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number and stage of cancers, interval cancers and cancer precursor states detected at screening.

RESULTS

Five studies fulfilled our review criteria. Surveillance modalities for endometrial cancer included transvaginal ultrasound combined with endometrial sampling when indicated, or transvaginal ultrasound with a routine endometrial biopsy, and, in certain studies, the tumor marker CA-125. The highest yield of pathological findings in surveillance visits, from 5 to 6.5%, occurred in studies that included routine endometrial biopsies. Without a routine sampling, 7/14 cancers and 11/18 hyperplasias would have been missed. One case of advanced ovarian cancer was detected at surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently available published studies on gynecological cancer surveillance in women with HNPCC do not adequately allow for evidence-based clinical decisions. Detection of endometrial cancer or hyperplasia in nonsymptomatic women belonging to an HNPCC family is improved by adding routine endometrial sampling along with transvaginal ultrasound for surveillance visits. No benefit was shown for ovarian cancer surveillance.

Endoscopic surveillance for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) family members in a Southern Italian region

BACKGROUND

Surveillance in hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) family members recommends baseline colonoscopy starting at age 20 and then surveillance colonoscopy every 1-2 years.

AIMS

To verify adherence to the guidelines for HNPCC family members enrolled in endoscopic surveillance.

METHODS

Data regarding 11 HNPCC families was retrieved from our database. Excluding 11 probands, 106 family members were evaluated and 40 underwent surveillance.

RESULTS

At baseline colonoscopy, 7 colorectal cancers (CRC), 14 polyps (PO) [1 inflammatory, 2 hyperplastic, 10 adenomas with low grade dysplasia (LGD-AD) and 1 adenoma with high-grade dysplasia (HGD-AD)] were diagnosed in sixteen individuals. Twenty-eight HNPCC family members underwent endoscopic surveillance, with a total of 94 surveillance colonoscopies. Of these, 45 were positive (4 CRC, 3 inflammatory PO, 34 hyperplastic PO, 21 LGD-AD and 5 HGD-AD). Mean time between two consecutive surveillance colonoscopies was 24.6 months (range 4-168). Median time to first positive surveillance colonoscopy was 84 months for HNPCC family members with negative baseline colonoscopy, and 60 months for those with positive baseline colonoscopy (p=0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggests that surveillance colonoscopy every 2 years is adequate to diagnose advanced lesions in HNPCC family members, and improves their compliance with surveillance.

The cost-effectiveness of genetic testing strategies for Lynch syndrome among newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of genetic testing strategies to identify Lynch syndrome among newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer and to offer targeted testing to relatives of patients with Lynch syndrome.

METHODS

We calculated incremental costs per life-year saved for universal testing relative to no testing and age-targeted testing for strategies that use preliminary genetic tests (immunohistochemistry or microsatellite instability) of tumors followed by sequencing of mismatch repair genes. We also calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for pairs of testing strategies.

RESULTS

Strategies to test for Lynch syndrome in newly diagnosed colorectal tumors using preliminary tests before gene sequencing have incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of <or=$45,000 per life-year saved compared with no testing and <or=$75,000 per life-year saved compared with testing restricted to patients younger than 50 years. The lowest cost testing strategies, using immunohistochemistry as a preliminary test, cost <or=$25,000 per life-year saved relative to no testing and <or=$40,000 per life-year saved relative to testing only patients younger than 50 years. Other testing strategies have incremental cost-effectiveness ratios >or=$700,000 per life-year saved relative to the lowest cost strategies. Increasing the number of relatives tested would improve cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Laboratory-based strategies using preliminary tests seem cost-effective from the US health care system perspective. Universal testing detects nearly twice as many cases of Lynch syndrome as targeting younger patients and has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparable with other preventive services. This finding provides support for a recent US recommendation to offer testing for Lynch syndrome to all newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer.

Spectrum of MLH1 and MSH2 mutations in Chilean families with suspected Lynch syndrome

PURPOSE

Lynch syndrome is the most common inherited syndrome of colorectal cancer, caused principally by germline mutations in MLH1 and MSH2. We report our experience with genetic screening in the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome in Chile, a country previously underserved in the capacity to diagnose hereditary colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Families from our Familial Colorectal Cancer Registry were selected for this study if they fulfilled either Amsterdam I/II or Bethesda criteria for classification of Lynch syndrome. Analysis of colorectal tumors from probands included a microsatellite instability study and immunohistochemical evaluation for MLH1 and MSH2. Screening of germline mutations was performed by single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis and DNA sequencing.

RESULTS

A total of 21 families were evaluated, 14 meeting Amsterdam criteria and 7 meeting Bethesda criteria. Tumors in 20 families (95%) showed microsatellite instability (19 high and 1 low) and 9 of these 20 families (45%) harbored a germline mutation (7 of 13 Amsterdam and 2 of 7 Bethesda families). Of the 9 mutations identified, 6 were in MLH1 and 3 in MSH2. Two of the mutations were novel, 3 were previously found in 1 to 2 European populations, and 4 were previously found in various ethnic populations worldwide. Only 2 mutations were previously found in another Latin American population (Colombia). In our probands, colorectal cancer was located mainly (57%) in the right or transverse colon. Pedigree information from 104 family affected members of 21 studied families showed endometrial cancer to be the most frequent primary extracolonic tumor, accounting for 15.1% of total cases, followed by stomach (13.2%) and breast cancer (11.3%). Analysis of mitochondrial DNA haplotypes showed a strong Amerindian genetic component in 15 (71.4%) of the 21 families analyzed.

CONCLUSION

The study of Lynch syndrome in families of different ethnic origins contributes to the definition of genetic and clinical differences among populations. Wide distribution in other ethnic populations strongly suggests varying origins of 4 the mutations found. Although cancer phenotype was consistent with those from other Latin American populations, only 2 of 9 mutations were shared with other South American populations and 2 novel mutations were found. The Chilean population is considered to be an admixture of Amerindian and European-mainly Spanish-populations, producing an ethnic group with significant genetic differences from populations previously studied.

Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed individuals with colorectal cancer aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome in relatives

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group found sufficient evidence to recommend offering genetic testing for Lynch syndrome to individuals with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer to reduce morbidity and mortality in relatives. We found insufficient evidence to recommend a specific genetic testing strategy among the several examined.

RATIONALE

Genetic testing to detect Lynch syndrome in individuals with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) is proposed as a strategy to reduce CRC morbidity and mortality in their relatives (see Clinical Considerations section for definition of Lynch syndrome). The EGAPP Working Group (EWG) constructed a chain of evidence that linked genetic testing for Lynch syndrome in patients with newly diagnosed CRC with improved health outcomes in their relatives. We found that assessing patients who have newly diagnosed CRC with a series of genetic tests could lead to the identification of Lynch syndrome. Relatives of patients with Lynch syndrome could then be offered genetic testing, and, where indicated, colorectal, and possibly endometrial, cancer surveillance, with the expectation of improved health outcome. The EWG concluded that there is moderate certainty that such a testing strategy would provide moderate population benefit.

ANALYTIC VALIDITY

The EWG found adequate evidence to conclude that the analytic sensitivity and specificity for preliminary and diagnostic tests were high.

CLINICAL VALIDITY

After accounting for the specific technologies and numbers of markers used, the EWG found at least adequate evidence to describe the clinical sensitivity and specificity for three preliminary tests, and for four selected testing strategies. These measures of clinical validity varied with each test and each strategy (see Clinical Considerations section).

CLINICAL UTILITY

The EWG found adequate evidence for testing uptake rates, adherence to recommended surveillance activities, number of relatives approachable, harms associated with additional follow-up, and effectiveness of routine colonoscopy. This chain of evidence supported the use of genetic testing strategies to reduce morbidity/mortality in relatives with Lynch syndrome. Several genetic testing strategies were potentially effective, but none was clearly superior. The evidence for or against effectiveness of identifying mismatch repair (MMR) gene mutations in reducing endometrial cancer morbidity or mortality was inadequate.

CONTEXTUAL ISSUES

CRC is a common disease responsible for an estimated 52,000 deaths in the United States in 2007. In about 3% of newly diagnosed CRC, the underlying cause is a mutation in a MMR gene (Lynch syndrome) that can be reliably identified with existing laboratory tests. Relatives inheriting the mutation have a high (about 45% by age 70) risk of developing CRC. Evidence suggests these relatives will often accept testing and increased surveillance.