Comparative effectiveness of screening strategies for Lynch syndrome

Performance evaluation of predictive models for detecting MMR gene mutations associated with Lynch syndrome in cancer patients in a Chinese cohort in Taiwan

Identifying Lynch syndrome significantly impacts cancer risk management, treatment, and prognosis. Validation of mutation risk predictive models for mismatch repair (MMR) genes is crucial for guiding genetic counseling and testing, particularly in the understudied Asian population. We evaluated the performance of four MMR mutation risk predictive models in a Chinese cohort of 604 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), endometrial cancer (EC), or ovarian cancer (OC) in Taiwan. All patients underwent germline genetic testing and 36 (6.0%) carried a mutation in the MMR genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2). All models demonstrated good performance, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves comparable to Western cohorts: PREMM5 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.88), MMRPro 0.88 (95% CI, 0.82-0.94), MMRPredict 0.82 (95% CI, 0.74-0.90), and Myriad 0.76 (95% CI, 0.67-0.84). Notably, MMRPro exhibited exceptional performance across all subgroups regardless of family history (FH+ 0.88, FH- 0.83), cancer type (CRC 0.84, EC 0.85, OC 1.00), or sex (male 0.83, female 0.90). PREMM5 and MMRPredict had good accuracy in the FH+ subgroup (0.85 and 0.82, respectively) and in CRC patients (0.76 and 0.82, respectively). Using the ratio of observed and predicted mutation rates, MMRPro and PREMM5 had good overall fit, while MMRPredict and Myriad overestimated mutation rates. Risk threshold settings in different models led to different positive predictive values. We suggest a lower threshold (5%) for recommending genetic testing when using MMRPro, and a higher threshold (20%) when using PREMM5 and MMRPredict. Our findings have important implications for personalized mutation risk assessment and counseling on genetic testing.

Economic evaluations of predictive genetic testing: A scoping review

Predictive genetic testing can provide information about whether or not someone will develop or is likely to develop a specific condition at a later stage in life. Economic evaluation can assess the value of money for such testing. Studies on the economic evaluation of predictive genetic testing have been carried out in a variety of settings, and this research aims to conduct a scoping review of findings from these studies. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases with combined search terms, from 2019 to 2022. Relevant studies from 2013 to 2019 in a previous systematic review were also included. The study followed the recommended stages for undertaking a scoping review. A total of 53 studies were included, including 33 studies from the previous review and 20 studies from the search of databases. A significant number of studies focused on the US, UK, and Australia (34%, 23%, and 11%). The most frequently included health conditions were cancer and cardiovascular diseases (68% and 19%). Over half of the studies compared predictive genetic testing with no genetic testing, and the majority of them concluded that at least some type of genetic testing was cost-effective compared to no testing (94%). Some studies stated that predictive genetic testing is becoming more cost-effective with the trend of lowering genetic testing costs. Studies on predictive genetic testing covered various health conditions, particularly cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Most studies indicated that predictive genetic testing is cost-effective compared to no testing.

Universal screening for Lynch syndrome in operated colorectal cancer by immunohistochemistry: a cohort of patients in Liaoning province, China

OBJECTIVE

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome worldwide. Due to the decreasing family size in Liaoning province. The Bethesda and Amsterdam II criteria have lower sensitivity and specificity and are not suitable for the local population. Immunohistochemistry screening for mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) in newly diagnosed colorectal cancer can improve the detection rate of LS.

METHODS

All newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients who underwent surgery between January 2018 and June 2020 at Cancer Hospital of China Medical University and Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University from Liaoning China were included retrospectively, and the ratio of universal LS screening by immunohistochemistry, MMR protein deficiency (dMMR) ratio, MLH1 loss, MSH2 loss, MSH6 loss, and PMS2 loss was analyzed. The clinicopathological characteristics of patients with pMMR and dMMR were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 7019 colorectal cancer patients underwent surgery and 4802 (68.41%) patients were screened by immunohistochemistry for MMR, 258 (5.37%) cases were reported to have a loss of MMR expression. In the dMMR group, a higher number of patients were under 50 years old, more tumors were located at the right colon, less patients have lymph node metastasis, more tumors were stage II, and histological types of mucinous carcinoma or signet ring carcinoma were more common, compared with the pMMR group. Only 2.71% dMMR patients meet Amsterdam criteria II, 2.71% of patients meet Revised Bethesda guidelines, and 17.83% meet Chinese LS criteria. Twenty-five dMMR patients were confirmed by next-generation sequencing and five families were confirmed as Lynch family.

CONCLUSION

These data imply that universal screening for LS by immunohistochemistry may be effective in Liaoning province.

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.

Evaluating the quality of the economic evidence in colorectal cancer genomics studies

The increase in the use of genome-based screening and diagnostic tests adds to the overall costs of oncologic care for colorectal cancer. This, in turn, has resulted in an increase in published economic analyses. Aim: To perform a systematic literature review of the available economic evidence evaluating the value of genomic testing for colorectal cancer and appraise the quality of the economic studies conducted to date. Methods: A systematic review of the literature for economic studies of colorectal cancer genomics from January 2006 through October 2020, and evaluation of study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was conducted. The validated QHES was then applied to a final set of articles that met eligibility criteria. Results: Our search of the literature initially yielded 12,859 records. A final set of 49 articles met our inclusion criteria. The QHES score ranged from 24 to 100, with an average score of 82. Most of the studies (n = 40, 82%) scored above 75 and were considered of good quality. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed that most of the economic analyses of colorectal cancer genomic molecular diagnostics in the literature may be of good quality. There is, however, some variation in methodological rigor between the articles.

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PURPOSE

Understanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.

RESULTS

Across the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.

CONCLUSION

We describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.

Microsatellite instability is biased in Amsterdam II-defined Lynch-related cancer cases with family history but is rare in other cancers: a summary of 1000 analyses

Background

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a key marker for predicting the response of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and for screening Lynch syndrome (LS).

Aim

This study aimed to see the characteristics of cancers with high level of MSI (MSI-H) in genetic medicine and precision medicine.

Methods

This study analyzed the incidence of MSI-H in 1000 cancers and compared according to several clinical and demographic factors.

Results

The incidence of MSI-H was highest in endometrial cancers (26.7%, 20/75), followed by small intestine (20%, 3/15) and colorectal cancers (CRCs)(13.7%, 64/466); the sum of these three cancers (15.6%) was significantly higher than that of other types (2.5%)(P < 0.0001). MSI-H was associated with LS-related cancers (P < 0.0001), younger age (P = 0.009), and family history, but not with smoking, drinking, or serum hepatitis virus markers. In CRC cases, MSI-H was significantly associated with a family history of LS-related cancer (P < 0.0001), Amsterdam II criteria [odds ratio (OR): 5.96], right side CRCs (OR: 4.89), and multiplicity (OR: 3.31). However, MSI-H was very rare in pancreatic (0.6%, 1/162) and biliary cancers (1.6%, 1/64) and was null in 25 familial pancreatic cancers. MSI-H was more recognized in cancers analyzed for genetic counseling (33.3%) than in those for ICI companion diagnostics (3.1%)(P < 0.0001). Even in CRCs, MSI-H was limited to 3.3% when analyzed for drug use.

Conclusions

MSI-H was predominantly recognized in LS-related cancer cases with specific family histories and younger age. MSI-H was limited to a small proportion in precision medicine especially for non-LS-related cancer cases.

Swiss cost-effectiveness analysis of universal screening for Lynch syndrome of patients with colorectal cancer followed by cascade genetic testing of relatives

Background

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of universal DNA screening for Lynch syndrome (LS) among newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) followed by cascade screening of relatives from the Swiss healthcare system perspective.

Methods

We integrated decision trees with Markov models to calculate incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year saved by screening all patients with CRC (alternative strategy) compared with CRC tumour-based testing followed by DNA sequencing (current strategy).

Results

The alternative strategy has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CHF65 058 compared with the current strategy, which is cost-effective according to Swiss standards. Based on annual incidence of CRC in Switzerland, universal DNA screening correctly identifies all 123 patients with CRC with LS, prevents 17 LS deaths and avoids 19 CRC cases, while the current strategy leads to 32 false negative results and 253 LS cases lost to follow-up. One way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that universal DNA testing is cost-effective in around 80% of scenarios, and that the cost of DNA testing and the number of invited relatives per LS case determine the cost-effectiveness ratio.

Conclusion

Results can inform policymakers, healthcare providers and insurance companies about the costs and benefits associated with universal screening for LS and cascade genetic testing of relatives.

MLH1 Deficiency Down-Regulates TLR4 Expression in Sporadic Colorectal Cancer

Patients with mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient colorectal cancer (CRC) have a more favorable prognosis than patients with tumors with intact MMR. In order to obtain further insights on the reasons for this different outcome, we investigated the interplay between MMR genes and TLR4/MyD88 signaling. The cancer genome atlas (TCGA) databases were selected to predict the differential expression of TLR4 in colon cancer and its correlation with MMR genes. Moreover, the expression of MMR genes and TLR4 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in 113 CRC samples and a cohort of 63 patients was used to assess TLR4 mRNA expression and MLH1 epigenetic silencing status. In vitro, the effect of MLH1 knockdown on TLR4 expression was quantified by Real Time PCR. TLR4 expression resulted dependent on MMR status and directly correlated to MLH1 expression. In vitro, MLH1 silencing decreased TLR4 expression. These observations may reflect the better prognosis and the chemoresistance of patients with CRC and MMR defects.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Molecular Screening to Identify Lynch Syndrome in the Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Background: Identifying Lynch syndrome (LS) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and monitoring their relatives can increase the life expectancy of these patients. Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of 5 molecular testing strategies to screen LS among patients with newly diagnosed CRC and to conduct preventive surveillance in their first-degree relatives. Methods: A decision tree model was designed to identify the number of LS mutations and the related costs in the CRC patients. Five strategies were modeled, i.e., Amsterdam II criteria, microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and next-generation sequencing (NGS). A Markov model was also used to estimate the long-term outcome of monitoring (including colonoscopy and taking aspirin) among relatives of those patients with CRC who carried LS. Results: All strategies were cost-effective compared with no testing condition. The 2 most cost-effective strategies were strategy 2 (IHC testing followed by NGS testing) and strategy 4 (MSI testing followed by NGS testing), with the ICER of 4,604$ and 4,748$ per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively. Based on one-way sensitivity analysis of IHC sensitivity, the Cost of colonoscopy, MSI sensitivity, and the number of families who inherited LS had the most effect on the results. Conclusions: The findings suggested that from an Iranian health care system perspective, IHC testing followed by NGS testing could be regarded as the most cost-effective strategy compared to the other strategies. These results can be useful in offering to screen LS in newly diagnosed CRC patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Active Identification and Subsequent Colonoscopy Surveillance of Lynch Syndrome Cases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The province of Ontario, Canada is considering immunohistochemical followed by cascade analyses of all patients who received a diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) at an age younger than 70 years to identify individuals with Lynch syndrome. We evaluated the costs and benefits of testing for Lynch syndrome and determined the optimal surveillance interval for first-degree relatives (FDRs) found to have Lynch syndrome.

METHODS

We developed a patient flow diagram to determine costs and yield of immunohistochemical testing for Lynch syndrome in CRC cases and, for those found to have Lynch syndrome, their FDRs, accounting for realistic uptake. Subsequently, we used the MISCAN-colon model to compare costs and benefits of annual, biennial, and triennial surveillance in FDRs identified with Lynch syndrome vs colonoscopy screening every 10 years (usual care for individuals without a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome).

RESULTS

Testing 1000 CRC cases was estimated to identify 20 CRC index cases and 29 FDRs with Lynch syndrome at a cost of $310,274. Despite the high cost of Lynch syndrome tests, offering the FDRs with Lynch syndrome biennial colonoscopy surveillance was cost-effective at $8785 per life-year gained compared with usual care because of a substantial increase in life-years gained (+122%) and cost savings in CRC care. Triennial surveillance was more costly and less effective, and annual surveillance showed limited additional benefit compared with biennial surveillance.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunohistochemical testing for Lynch syndrome in persons younger than 70 years who received a diagnosis of CRC and then testing FDRs of those found to have Lynch syndrome provide a good balance between costs and long-term benefits. Colonoscopy surveillance every 2 years is the optimal surveillance interval for patients with Lynch syndrome.

Cost-effectiveness of precision medicine: a scoping review

Objectives

Precision medicine (PM) aims to improve patient outcomes by stratifying or individualizing diagnosis and treatment decisions. Previous reviews found inconclusive evidence as to the cost-effectiveness of PM. The purpose of this scoping review was to describe current research findings on the cost-effectiveness of PM and to identify characteristics of cost-effective interventions.

Methods

We searched PubMed with a combination of terms related to PM and economic evaluations and included studies published between 2014 and 2017.

Results

A total of 83 articles were included, of which two-thirds were published in Europe and the USA. The majority of studies concluded that the PM intervention was at least cost-effective compared to usual care. However, the willingness-to-pay thresholds varied widely. Key factors influencing cost-effectiveness included the prevalence of the genetic condition in the target population, costs of genetic testing and companion treatment and the probability of complications or mortality.

Conclusions

This review may help inform decisions about reimbursement, research and development of PM interventions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00038-019-01298-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Germline mismatch repair gene variants analyzed by universal sequencing in Japanese cancer patients

Background

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the commonest inherited cancer syndrome caused by pathogenic variants of germline DNA mismatch repair (g.MMR) genes. Genome‐wide sequencing is now increasingly applied for tumor characterization, but not for g.MMR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and pathogenicity of g.MMR variants in Japanese cancer patients.

Methods

Four g.MMR genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) were analyzed by next generation sequencing in 1058 cancer patients (614 male, 444 female; mean age 65.6 years) without past diagnosis of LS. The g.MMR variant pathogenicity was classified based on the ClinVar 2015 database. Tumor MMR immunohistochemistry, microsatellite instability (MSI), and BRAF sequencing were also investigated in specific cases.

Results

Overall, 46 g.MMR variants were detected in 167 (15.8%) patients, 17 likely benign variants in 119 patients, 24 variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in 68 patients, two likely pathogenic variants in two patients, and three pathogenic variants in three (0.3%) patients. The three pathogenic variants included two colorectal cancers with MLH1 loss and high MSI and one endometrial cancer with MSH6 loss and microsatellite stability. Two likely pathogenic variants were shifted to VUSs by ClinVar (2018). One colon cancer with a likely benign variant demonstrated MLH1 loss and BRAF mutation, but other nonpathogenic variants showed sustained MMR and microsatellite stability.

Conclusions

Universal sequencing of g.MMR genes demonstrated sundry benign variants, but only a small proportion of cancer patients had pathogenic variants. Pathogenicity evaluation using the ClinVar database agreed with MSI, MMR immunohistochemistry, and BRAF sequencing.

Comparison of screening strategies for Lynch syndrome in patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer: a prospective cohort study in China

Background

The prevalence of Lynch syndrome and screening strategies for this disorder in Chinese patients with endometrial cancer have seldom been investigated. Such data would be essential for the screening, prevention, genetic counseling, and treatment of Lynch syndrome. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the accuracy of the mismatch repair (MMR) protein immunohistochemistry (IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI) test, and clinical diagnostic criteria in screening for Lynch syndrome-associated endometrial cancer (LS-EC) in a prospective Chinese cohort.

Methods

All patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer (EC) were evaluated using clinical diagnostic criteria (Amsterdam II criteria and the revised Bethesda guidelines), MSI test, and IHC of MMR proteins in tumor tissues. For all patients, the screening results were compared with results of germline sequencing for pathogenic variants of MMR genes.

Results

Between December 2017 and August 2018, a total of 111 unselected patients with newly diagnosed EC were enrolled. Six patients (5.4%) harbored a pathogenic germline mutation of MMR genes: 1 had a mutation in MutL homolog 1 (MLH1), 2 in MutS homolog 2 (MSH2), and 3 in MutS homolog 6 (MSH6). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for identifying LS-EC were 33.3%, 88.6%, 14.3%, and 95.9%, for the clinical criteria, 66.7%, 75.0%, 14.3%, and 97.3% for IHC of MMR proteins, 100%, 89.9%, 33.3%, and 100% for MSI test, and 100%, 72.4%, 20.0% and 100% for combined IHC and MSI test, respectively. The combination of IHC and MSI test had higher sensitivity and PPV than the clinical criteria (p = 0.030). MSI test and IHC were highly concordant for LS-EC screening (73/77, 94.8%).

Conclusion

The accuracy of the combination of IHC of MMR proteins and MSI test for screening LS among Chinese patients with EC was superior to that of the clinical criteria.

Trial registration NCT03291106. Registered on September 25, 2017

Evaluation of current prediction models for Lynch syndrome: updating the PREMM5 model to identify PMS2 mutation carriers

Until recently, no prediction models for Lynch syndrome (LS) had been validated for PMS2 mutation carriers. We aimed to evaluate MMRpredict and PREMM5 in a clinical cohort and for PMS2 mutation carriers specifically. In a retrospective, clinic-based cohort we calculated predictions for LS according to MMRpredict and PREMM5. The area under the operator receiving characteristic curve (AUC) was compared between MMRpredict and PREMM5 for LS patients in general and for different LS genes specifically. Of 734 index patients, 83 (11%) were diagnosed with LS; 23 MLH1, 17 MSH2, 31 MSH6 and 12 PMS2 mutation carriers. Both prediction models performed well for MLH1 and MSH2 (AUC 0.80 and 0.83 for PREMM5 and 0.79 for MMRpredict) and fair for MSH6 mutation carriers (0.69 for PREMM5 and 0.66 for MMRpredict). MMRpredict performed fair for PMS2 mutation carriers (AUC 0.72), while PREMM5 failed to discriminate PMS2 mutation carriers from non-mutation carriers (AUC 0.51). The only statistically significant difference between PMS2 mutation carriers and non-mutation carriers was proximal location of colorectal cancer (77 vs. 28%, p < 0.001). Adding location of colorectal cancer to PREMM5 considerably improved the models performance for PMS2 mutation carriers (AUC 0.77) and overall (AUC 0.81 vs. 0.72). We validated these results in an external cohort of 376 colorectal cancer patients, including 158 LS patients. MMRpredict and PREMM5 cannot adequately identify PMS2 mutation carriers. Adding location of colorectal cancer to PREMM5 may improve the performance of this model, which should be validated in larger cohorts.

Testing strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Lynch syndrome (LS) has an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern and is associated with increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) and other cancers. Various strategies are used to identify patients at risk and offer surveillance and preventive programs, the cost effectiveness of which is much dependent on the prevalence of LS in a population. Universal testing (UT) is proposed as an effective measure, targeting all newly diagnosed CRC patients under a certain age.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LS cases were identified in a cohort of 572 consecutive CRC patients. Immunohistochemistry was performed in 539 cases, using antibodies against mismatch repair proteins MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6. Microsatellite instability and gene mutation screening were performed in 57 cases.

RESULTS

In total 11 pathogenic variants were detected, identifying LS in 1.9% of new CRC cases. Comparing the results with current clinical methods, 2 pathogenic variants were found with Amsterdam criteria and 9 when using either Bethesda guidelines or our institution's prior clinical criteria. Pathogenic variants in MSH6 were the most common in our series. We also found different outcomes using different age cut offs.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that UT of tumors before age on onset at 75 years would most likely be cost-efficient and essentially equivalent to applying the Bethesda guidelines or our institution's prior clinical criteria on all new CRC.

Routine Molecular Analysis for Lynch Syndrome Among Adenomas or Colorectal Cancer Within a National Screening Program

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is important to identify individuals with Lynch syndrome because surveillance programs can reduce their morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC). We assessed the diagnostic yield of immunohistochemistry to detect Lynch syndrome in patients with advanced and multiple adenomas within our national CRC screening program.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of all participants (n = 1101; 55% male; median age, 66 years; interquartile range, 61-70 years) referred to the Erasmus MC in The Netherlands after a positive result from a fecal immunohistochemical test, from December 2013 to December 2016. Colon tissues were collected from patients with advanced adenomas, ≥4 nonadvanced adenomas, or CRC, and analyzed by immunohistochemistry to identify patients with loss of mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2): a marker of Lynch syndrome. Specimens from patients with loss of MLH1 were analyzed for MLH1 promoter hypermethylation. Patients with an MMR-deficient tumor or adenoma without MLH1 promoter hypermethylation were referred for genetic analysis.

RESULTS

At colonoscopy, 456 patients (41%) (65% male; mean age, 67 years; interquartile range, 63-71 years) were found to have CRC and/or an adenoma eligible for analysis by immunohistochemistry. Of 56 CRCs, 7 (13%) had lost an MMR protein and 5 had hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter. Analyses of tumor DNA revealed that 2 patients without MLH1 promoter hypermethylation had developed sporadic tumors. In total, 400 patients with adenomas were analyzed. Of the examined adenomas, 208 (52%) had a villous component and/or high-grade dysplasia: 186 (47%) had a villous component and 41 (10%) had high-grade dysplasia. Only 1 adenoma had lost an MMR protein. This adenoma was found to have 2 somatic mutations in MSH6.

CONCLUSIONS

In a CRC screening program in The Netherlands for individuals aged 55 to 75 years, routine screening for Lynch syndrome by immunohistochemistry analysis of colon tissues from patients with advanced and multiple adenomas identified no individuals with this genetic disorder.

Mismatch repair deficiency assessment by immunohistochemistry: for Lynch syndrome screening and beyond

While mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency has been studied extensively, the assessment of MMR status in colorectal and other cancers remains highly relevant, particularly in light of recent data demonstrating that MMR deficiency is a strong predictor for treatment benefit with immune checkpoint inhibitors across multiple tumor types. In colorectal cancer, there is a growing consensus in support of routine MMR testing for Lynch syndrome screening, to inform prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy use in early stage disease, and to predict response to immunotherapy in advanced disease. Here, we provide a review of the Ventana MMR Immunohistochemistry Panel, which was recently approved by the US FDA for use in Lynch syndrome screening.

Costs and outcomes of Lynch syndrome screening in the Australian colorectal cancer population

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Individuals with Lynch syndrome (LS) are at increased risk of LS-related cancers including colorectal cancer (CRC). CRC tumor screening for mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency is recommended in Australia to identify LS, although its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed. We aim to determine the cost-effectiveness of screening individuals with CRC for LS at different age-at-diagnosis thresholds.

METHODS

We developed a decision analysis model to estimate yield and costs of LS screening. Age-specific probabilities of LS diagnosis were based on Australian data. Two CRC tumor screening pathways were assessed (MMR immunohistochemistry followed by MLH1 methylation (MLH1-Pathway) or BRAF V600E testing (BRAF-Pathway) if MLH1 expression was lost) for four age-at-diagnosis thresholds-screening < 50, screening < 60, screening < 70, and universal screening.

RESULTS

Per 1000 CRC cases, screening < 50 identified 5.2 LS cases and cost $A7041 per case detected in the MLH1-Pathway. Screening < 60 increased detection by 1.5 cases for an incremental cost of $A25 177 per additional case detected. Screening < 70 detected 1.6 additional cases at an incremental cost of $A40 278 per additional case detected. Compared with screening < 70, universal screening detected no additional LS cases but cost $A158 724 extra. The BRAF-Pathway identified the same number of LS cases for higher costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The MLH1-Pathway is more cost-effective than BRAF-Pathway for all age-at-diagnosis thresholds. MMR immunohistochemistry tumor screening in individuals diagnosed with CRC aged < 70 years resulted in higher LS case detection at a reasonable cost. Further research into the yield of LS screening in CRC patients ≥ 70 years is needed to determine if universal screening is justified.

Molecular testing for Lynch syndrome in people with colorectal cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation

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.

Personalized medicine in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment: a systematic review of health economic evaluations

Background

Due to its epidemiological relevance, several studies have been performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tests and treatments in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

Objective

We reviewed economic evaluations on diagnosis of inherited CRC-syndromes and genetic tests for the detection of mutations associated with response to therapeutics.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed by searching the main literature databases for relevant papers on the field, published in the last 5 years.

Results

20 studies were included in the final analysis: 14 investigating the cost-effectiveness of hereditary-CRC screening; 5 evaluating the cost-effectiveness of KRAS mutation assessment before treatment; and 1 study analysing the cost-effectiveness of genetic tests for early-stage CRC patients prognosis. Overall, we found that: (a) screening strategies among CRC patients were more effective than no screening; (b) all the evaluated interventions were cost-saving for certain willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold; and (c) all new CRC patients diagnosed at age 70 or below should be screened. Regarding patients treatment, we found that KRAS testing is economically sustainable only if anticipated in patients with non-metastatic CRC (mCRC), while becoming unsustainable, due to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) beyond the levels of WTP-threshold, in all others evaluated scenarios.

Conclusions

The poor evidence in the field, combined to the number of assumptions done to perform the models, lead us to a high level of uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness of genetic evaluations in CRC, suggesting that major research is required in order to assess the best combination among detection tests, type of genetic test screening and targeted-therapy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-018-0085-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.”

Performance of Lynch syndrome predictive models in quantifying the likelihood of germline mutations in patients with abnormal MLH1 immunoexpression

Lynch syndrome (LS) accounts for up to 4 % of all colorectal cancers (CRC). Detection of a pathogenic germline mutation in one of the mismatch repair genes is the definitive criterion for LS diagnosis, but it is time-consuming and expensive. Immunohistochemistry is the most sensitive prescreening test and its predictive value is very high for loss of expression of MSH2, MSH6, and (isolated) PMS2, but not for MLH1. We evaluated if LS predictive models have a role to improve the molecular testing algorithm in this specific setting by studying 38 individuals referred for molecular testing and who were subsequently shown to have loss of MLH1 immunoexpression in their tumors. For each proband we calculated a risk score, which represents the probability that the patient with CRC carries a pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation, using the PREMM_1,2,6 and MMRpro predictive models. Of the 38 individuals, 18.4 % had a pathogenic MLH1 germline mutation. MMRpro performed better for the purpose of this study, presenting a AUC of 0.83 (95 % CI 0.67-0.9; P < 0.001) compared with a AUC of 0.68 (95 % CI 0.51-0.82, P = 0.09) for PREMM_1,2,6. Considering a threshold of 5 %, MMRpro would eliminate unnecessary germline mutation analysis in a significant proportion of cases while keeping very high sensitivity. We conclude that MMRpro is useful to correctly predict who should be screened for a germline MLH1 gene mutation and propose an algorithm to improve the cost-effectiveness of LS diagnosis.

Comparative effectiveness of screening strategies for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) has been successful in decreasing the incidence and mortality from CRC. Although new screening tests have become available, their relative impact on CRC outcomes remains unexplored. This study compares the outcomes of various screening strategies on CRC outcomes.

METHODS

A Markov model representing the natural history of CRC was built and validated against empiric data from screening trials as well as the Microstimulation Screening Analysis (MISCAN) model. Thirteen screening strategies based on colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography, as well as fecal immunochemical, occult blood, and stool DNA testing were compared with no screening. A simulated sample of the US general population ages 50 to 75 years with an average risk of CRC was followed for up to 35 years or until death. Effectiveness was measured by discounted life years gained and the number of CRCs prevented. Discounted costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. A discount rate of 3% was used in calculations. The study took a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy emerged as the most effective screening strategy with the highest life years gained (0.022 life years) and CRCs prevented (n = 1068) and the lowest total costs ($2861). These values were 0.012 life years gained, 574 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $3164, respectively, for FOBT; and 0.011 life years gained, 647 CRCs prevented, and a total cost of $4296, respectively, for DNA testing. Improved sensitivity or specificity of a screening test for CRC detection was not sufficient to close the outcomes gap compared with colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement in CRC-detection performance is not sufficient to improve screening outcomes. Special attention must be directed to detecting precancerous adenomas. Cancer 2017;123:1516-1527. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer patients up to 70years of age

PURPOSE

To assess cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients ≤70years of age.

METHODS

Consecutive EC patients ≤70years of age were screened for LS by analysis of microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry and MLH1 hypermethylation. Costs and health benefit in life years gained (LYG) included surveillance for LS carriers among EC patients and relatives. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing LS screening among EC patients ≤70years with ≤50years and the revised Bethesda guidelines.

RESULTS

Screening for LS in 179 EC patients identified 7 LS carriers; 1 was ≤50 and 6 were 51-70years. Per age category 18 and 9 relatives were identified as LS carrier. Screening resulted in 74,7 LYG (45,4 and 29,3 LYG per age category). The ICER for LS screening in EC patients ≤70 compared with ≤50years was €5,252/LYG. The revised Bethesda guidelines missed 4/7 (57%) LS carriers among EC patients. The ICER for LS screening in EC patients ≤70years of age compared with the revised Bethesda guidelines was €6,668/LYG. Both ICERs remained <€16,000/LYG in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Routine LS screening in EC patients ≤70years is a cost-effective strategy, allowing colorectal cancer prevention in EC patients and their relatives.

Familial Colorectal Cancer: Understanding the Alphabet Soup

While most colorectal cancers (CRCs) originate from nonhereditary spontaneous mutations, one-third of cases are familial or hereditary. Hereditary CRCs, which account for < 5% of all CRCs, have identifiable germline mutations and phenotypes, such as Lynch syndrome and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Familial CRCs, which account for up to 30% of CRCs, have no identifiable germline mutation or specific pattern of inheritance, but higher-than-expected incidence within a family. Since the discovery that certain genotypes can lead to development of CRC, thousands of mutations have now been implicated in CRC. These new findings have enhanced our ability to identify at-risk patients, initiate better surveillance, and take preventative measures. Given the large number of genes now associated with hereditary and familial CRCs, clinicians should be familiar with the alphabet soup of genes to provide the highest quality of care for patients and families.

Familial colorectal cancer: Patient assessment, surveillance and surgical management

Germline mutations account for 5-10% of colorectal cancer. Most mutations are autosomal dominant with high penetrance and affected patients benefit greatly from appropriate treatment. This review presents the current knowledge regarding familial colorectal cancer and provides practical information based on international guidelines and the best available evidence regarding patient assessment, surveillance and surgical management. Surgeons are often the first point of contact and frequently, the main provider of care for families with cancer syndromes or patients with familial cancer. Patients with a polyposis phenotype should undergo appropriate genetic testing. In non-polyposis patients with a cancer diagnosis, tumor testing for Lynch syndrome can guide the use of genetic testing. In patients without a personal history of cancer or polyposis, a carefully obtained family history with testing of available tumor tissue or of a living relative affected by colorectal cancer informs the need for genetic testing. Surveillance and surgical management should be planned following thorough assessment of familial cancer risk. Evidence exists to provide guidance as to the surveillance strategies required, the specific indications of genetic testing and the appropriate timing of operative intervention. A carefully obtained family history with selective genetic testing should inform surveillance and surgical management in patients who have a genetic predisposition for the development of colorectal cancer.

Genetic testing for hereditary cancer predisposition: BRCA1/2, Lynch syndrome, and beyond

Obstetrician/gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists serve an integral role in the care of women at increased hereditary risk of cancer. Their contribution includes initial identification of high risk patients, screening procedures like bimanual exam, trans-vaginal ultrasound and endometrial biopsy, prophylaxis via TAH and/or BSO, and chemoprevention. Further, gynecologists also serve a central role in the management of the secondary repercussions of efforts to mitigate increased cancer risks, including vasomotor symptoms, sexual function, bone health, cardiovascular disease, and mental health. The past several years has seen multiple new high and moderate penetrance genes introduced into the clinical care of women at increased risk of gynecologic malignancy. Awareness of these new genes and the availability of new multi-gene panel tests is critical for providers on the front-line of women's health.

Combined Microsatellite Instability, MLH1 Methylation Analysis, and Immunohistochemistry for Lynch Syndrome Screening in Endometrial Cancers From GOG210: An NRG Oncology and Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

PURPOSE

The best screening practice for Lynch syndrome (LS) in endometrial cancer (EC) remains unknown. We sought to determine whether tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) typing along with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and MLH1 methylation analysis can help identify women with LS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ECs from GOG210 patients were assessed for MSI, MLH1 methylation, and mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression. Each tumor was classified as having normal MMR, defective MMR associated with MLH1 methylation, or probable MMR mutation (ie, defective MMR but no methylation). Cancer family history and demographic and clinical features were compared for the three groups. Lynch mutation testing was performed for a subset of women.

RESULTS

Analysis of 1,002 ECs suggested possible MMR mutation in 11.8% of tumors. The number of patients with a family history suggestive of LS was highest among women whose tumors were classified as probable MMR mutation (P = .001). Lynch mutations were identified in 41% of patient cases classified as probable mutation (21 of 51 tested). One of the MSH6 Lynch mutations was identified in a patient whose tumor had intact MSH6 expression. Age at diagnosis was younger for mutation carriers than noncarriers (54.3 v 62.3 years; P < .01), with five carriers diagnosed at age > 60 years.

CONCLUSION

Combined MSI, methylation, and IHC analysis may prove useful in Lynch screening in EC. Twenty-four percent of mutation carriers presented with ECs at age > 60 years, and one carrier had an MSI-positive tumor with no IHC defect. Restricting Lynch testing to women diagnosed at age < 60 years or to women with IHC defects could result in missing a substantial fraction of genetic disease.

When is Genomic Testing Cost-Effective? Testing for Lynch Syndrome in Patients with Newly-Diagnosed Colorectal Cancer and Their Relatives

Varying estimates of the cost-effectiveness of genomic testing applications can reflect differences in study questions, settings, methods and assumptions. This review compares recently published cost-effectiveness analyses of testing strategies for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in tumors from patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) for either all adult patients or patients up to age 70 along with cascade testing of relatives of probands. Seven studies published from 2010 through 2015 were identified and summarized. Five studies analyzed the universal offer of testing to adult patients with CRC and two others analyzed testing patients up to age 70; all except one reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) < $ 100,000 per life-year or quality-adjusted life-year gained. Three studies found lower ICERs for selective testing strategies using family history-based predictive models compared with universal testing. However, those calculations were based on estimates of sensitivity of predictive models derived from research studies, and it is unclear how sensitive such models are in routine clinical practice. Key model parameters that are influential in ICER estimates included 1) the number of first-degree relatives tested per proband identified with LS and 2) the cost of gene sequencing. Others include the frequency of intensive colonoscopic surveillance, the cost of colonoscopy, and the inclusion of extracolonic surveillance and prevention options.

Availability and scope of integrated screening for patients with Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To assess the availability and capacity of US-based integrated centers for the management of Lynch syndrome.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of practice patterns in the care of patients with Lynch syndrome was conducted at 33 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in the USA from March 1 to June 1, 2013. Each cancer center was contacted by telephone and the caller used a uniform scripted greeting and survey format.

RESULTS

All centers routinely recommended colonoscopy. Other recommended screening modalities were hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (29/33; 88%), endoscopy (27/33; 82%), urinalysis (23/33; 70%), endometrial sampling (21/33; 64%), dermatologic examination (19/32; 59%), pelvic ultrasonography (18/33; 55%), serum CA125 level (14/33; 42%), urine cytology (14/33; 42%), computed tomography (1/33; 3%), and magnetic resonance imaging (1/33; 3%). Each center had a multidisciplinary team but the composition varied. A designated team leader was present at 21 centers (64%). Having a team leader was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending endoscopy (P=0.04) and dermatologic surveillance (P=0.01). Only 23 centers (70%) had a system in place for communicating follow-up with patients.

CONCLUSION

The lack of consensus in practice patterns recorded among participating centers probably reflected the limited existing evidence on the usefulness of most screening modalities.