The predicted impact and cost-effectiveness of systematic testing of people with incident colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of systematic testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in people with incident colorectal cancer (CRC) in Australia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We investigated the impact of LS testing strategies in a micro-simulation model (Policy1-Lynch), explicitly modelling the cost of testing all patients diagnosed with incident CRC during 2017, with detailed modelling of outcomes for patients identified as LS carriers (probands) and their at-risk relatives throughout their lifetimes. For people with confirmed LS, we modelled ongoing colonoscopic surveillance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness of six universal tumour testing strategies (testing for DNA mismatch repair deficiencies) and of universal germline gene panel testing of patients with incident CRC; impact on cost-effectiveness of restricting testing by age at CRC diagnosis (all ages, under 50/60/70 years) and of colonoscopic surveillance interval (one, two years). RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness ratio of universal tumour testing strategies (annual colonoscopic surveillance, no testing age limit) compared with no testing ranged from $28 915 to $31 904/life-year saved (LYS) (indicative willingness-to-pay threshold: $30 000-$50 000/LYS). These strategies could avert 184-189 CRC deaths with an additional 30 597-31 084 colonoscopies over the lifetimes of 1000 patients with incident CRC with LS and 1420 confirmed LS carrier relatives (164-166 additional colonoscopies/death averted). The most cost-effective strategy was immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER], $28 915/LYS). Universal germline gene panel testing was not cost-effective compared with universal tumour testing strategies (ICER, $2.4 million/LYS). Immunohistochemistry and BRAF V600E testing was cost-effective at all age limits when paired with 2-yearly colonoscopic surveillance (ICER, $11 525-$32 153/LYS), and required 4778-15 860 additional colonoscopies to avert 46-181 CRC deaths (88-103 additional colonoscopies/death averted). CONCLUSIONS: Universal tumour testing strategies for guiding germline genetic testing of people with incident CRC for LS in Australia are likely to be cost-effective compared with no testing. Universal germline gene panel testing would not currently be cost-effective.

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."

Initiation of universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer patients as a model for the implementation of genetic information into clinical oncology practice.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome confers a hereditary predisposition to colorectal and other cancers. Universal tumor screening (UTS) for Lynch syndrome is recommended by several professional societies, but the implementation can be complex. This article describes the evaluation, process development, and initiation of Lynch syndrome UTS at a tertiary referral cancer center. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team developed the new process design. Issues in 5 themes were noted: timing, funding, second-opinion patients, result processing, and the role of genetics providers. A committee approach was used to examine each issue for process-improvement development. RESULTS: The issues related to testing were addressed individually for the successful implementation of UTS at the institutional level. In the conventional-care period, 9 of 30 cases (30%) received Lynch syndrome screening, and 4 cases were referred to medical genetics. During the 6 months following the implementation of UTS, 32 of 44 patients (73%) received Lynch syndrome screening. The 13 unscreened patients all had identified reasons for nonscreening (eg, financial limitations). Ten patients were referred to medical genetics, which identified no new cases of Lynch syndrome, but a low-risk adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) variant was detected in 1 individual. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of effective Lynch syndrome UTS can feasibly alter practice at the institutional level. This experience with the assessment and management of issues relevant to the successful implementation of a new clinical care paradigm based on emerging technology has implications for the uptake of advances across molecular oncology into clinical practice, and this is highly relevant in the current era of rapidly evolving genomic technology.

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

PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of routine Lynch syndrome (LS) screening among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients ≤70 years of age. METHODS: A population-based series of CRC patients ≤70 years of age was routinely screened for LS. We calculated life years gained (LYG) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for different age cutoffs and comparing age-targeted screening with the revised Bethesda guidelines. RESULTS: Screening 1,117 CRC patients identified 23 LS patients, of whom 7 were ≤50 years of age, 7 were 51-60, and 9 were 61-70. Additionally, 70 LS carriers were identified among relatives (14, 42, and 14 per age category). Screening amounted to 205.9 LYG or 43.6, 118.0, and 44.3 LYG per age category. ICERs were [euro ]4.226/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤60 years of age compared with those ≤50 years and [euro ]7.051/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤70 years compared with those ≤60 years. The revised Bethesda guidelines identified 70 of 93 (75%) LS carriers. The ICER for LS screening in CRC patients ≤70 years of age compared with the revised Bethesda guidelines was [euro ]7.341/LYG. All ICERs remained less than [euro ]13.000/LYG in one-way sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Routine LS screening by analysis of microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry, and MLH1 hypermethylation in CRC patients ≤70 years of age is a cost-effective strategy with important clinical benefits for CRC patients and their relatives.Genet Med 18 10, 966-973.

Universal Versus Targeted Screening for Lynch Syndrome: Comparing Ascertainment and Costs Based on Clinical Experience.

BACKGROUND: Strategies to screen colorectal cancers (CRCs) for Lynch syndrome are evolving rapidly; the optimal strategy remains uncertain. AIM: We compared targeted versus universal screening of CRCs for Lynch syndrome. METHODS: In 2010-2011, we employed targeted screening (age < 60 and/or Bethesda criteria). From 2012 to 2014, we screened all CRCs. Immunohistochemistry for the four mismatch repair proteins was done in all cases, followed by other diagnostic studies as indicated. We modeled the diagnostic costs of detecting Lynch syndrome and estimated the 5-year costs of preventing CRC by colonoscopy screening, using a system dynamics model. RESULTS: Using targeted screening, 51/175 (29 %) cancers fit criteria and were tested by immunohistochemistry; 15/51 (29 %, or 8.6 % of all CRCs) showed suspicious loss of ≥1 mismatch repair protein. Germline mismatch repair gene mutations were found in 4/4 cases sequenced (11 suspected cases did not have germline testing). Using universal screening, 17/292 (5.8 %) screened cancers had abnormal immunohistochemistry suspicious for Lynch syndrome. Germline mismatch repair mutations were found in only 3/10 cases sequenced (7 suspected cases did not have germline testing). The mean cost to identify Lynch syndrome probands was ~$23,333/case for targeted screening and ~$175,916/case for universal screening at our institution. Estimated costs to identify and screen probands and relatives were: targeted, $9798/case and universal, $38,452/case. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world Lynch syndrome management, incomplete clinical follow-up was the major barrier to do genetic testing. Targeted screening costs 2- to 7.5-fold less than universal and rarely misses Lynch syndrome cases. Future changes in testing costs will likely change the optimal algorithm.

A model-based assessment of the cost-utility of strategies to identify Lynch syndrome in early-onset colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome is an autosomal dominant cancer predisposition syndrome caused by mutations in the DNA mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2. Individuals with Lynch syndrome have an increased risk of colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian and other cancers. Lynch syndrome remains underdiagnosed in the UK. Reflex testing for Lynch syndrome in early-onset colorectal cancer patients is proposed as a method to identify more families affected by Lynch syndrome and offer surveillance to reduce cancer risks, although cost-effectiveness is viewed as a barrier to implementation. The objective of this project was to estimate the cost-utility of strategies to identify Lynch syndrome in individuals with early-onset colorectal cancer in the NHS. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed which simulated diagnostic and long-term outcomes over a lifetime horizon for colorectal cancer patients with and without Lynch syndrome and for relatives of those patients. Nine diagnostic strategies were modelled which included microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, immunohistochemistry (IHC), BRAF mutation testing (methylation testing in a scenario analysis), diagnostic mutation testing and Amsterdam II criteria. Biennial colonoscopic surveillance was included for individuals diagnosed with Lynch syndrome and accepting surveillance. Prophylactic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (H-BSO) was similarly included for women diagnosed with Lynch syndrome. Costs from NHS and Personal Social Services perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated and discounted at 3.5% per annum. RESULTS: All strategies included for the identification of Lynch syndrome were cost-effective versus no testing. The strategy with the greatest net health benefit was MSI followed by BRAF followed by diagnostic genetic testing, costing £5,491 per QALY gained over no testing. The effect of prophylactic H-BSO on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is uncertain and could outweigh the health benefits of testing, resulting in overall QALY loss. CONCLUSIONS: Reflex testing for Lynch syndrome in early-onset colorectal cancer patients is predicted to be a cost-effective use of limited financial resources in England and Wales. Research is recommended into the cost-effectiveness of reflex testing for Lynch syndrome in other associated cancers and into the impact of prophylactic H-BSO on HRQoL.

Fourfold increased detection of Lynch syndrome by raising age limit for tumour genetic testing from 50 to 70 years is cost-effective.

BACKGROUND: Recognising colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) can increase life expectancy of these patients and their close relatives. To improve identification of this under-diagnosed disease, experts suggested raising the age limit for CRC tumour genetic testing from 50 to 70 years. The present study evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of this strategy. METHODS: Probabilistic efficacy and cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out comparing tumour genetic testing of CRC diagnosed at age 70 or below (experimental strategy) versus CRC diagnosed at age 50 or below (current practice). The proportions of LS patients identified and cost-effectiveness including cascade screening of relatives, were calculated by decision analytic models based on real-life data. RESULTS: Using the experimental strategy, four times more LS patients can be identified among CRC patients when compared with current practice. Both the costs to detect one LS patient (€9437/carrier versus €4837/carrier), and the number needed to test for detecting one LS patient (42 versus 19) doubled. When family cascade screening was included, the experimental strategy was found to be highly cost-effective according to Dutch standards, resulting in an overall ratio of €2703 per extra life-year gained in additionally tested patients. CONCLUSION: Testing all CRC tumours diagnosed at or below age 70 for LS is cost-effective. Implementation is important as relatives from the large number of LS patients that are missed by current practice, can benefit from life-saving surveillance.

Cost-effectiveness and diagnostic effectiveness analyses of multiple algorithms for the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal algorithm to identify Lynch syndrome (LS) among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear. The definitive test for LS, germline testing, is too expensive to be applied in all cases. Initial screening with the revised Bethesda Guidelines (RBG) cannot be applied in a considerable number of cases due to missing information. METHODS: We developed a model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 10 strategies for diagnosing LS. Three main issues are addressed: modeling estimates (20-40%) of RBG applicability; comparing sequential or parallel use of microsatellite instability (MSI) and immunohistochemistry (IHC); and a threshold analysis of the charge value below which universal germline testing becomes the most cost-effective strategy. RESULTS: LS detection rates in RBG-based strategies decreased to 64.1-70.6% with 20% inapplicable RBG. The strategy that uses MSI alone had lower yield, but also lower cost than strategies that use MSI sequentially or in parallel with IHC. The use of MSI and IHC in parallel was less affected by variations in the sensitivity and specificity of these tests. Universal germline testing had the highest yield and the highest cost of all strategies. The model estimated that if charges for germline testing drop to $633-1,518, universal testing of all newly diagnosed CRC cases becomes the most cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The low applicability of RBG makes strategies employing initial laboratory-based testing more cost-effective. Of these strategies, parallel testing with MSI and IHC offers the most robust yield. With a considerable drop in cost, universal germline testing may become the most cost-effective strategy for the diagnosis of LS.

Preferences for outcomes associated with decisions to undergo or forgo genetic testing for Lynch syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend offering genetic testing for Lynch syndrome to individuals whose tumors suggest this condition and to relatives of affected individuals. Little is known, however, regarding how patients view the prospect of such testing. In addition, data on preferences (utilities) for the potential outcomes of testing decisions for use in cost-effectiveness analyses are lacking. METHODS: Time tradeoff utilities were elicited for 10 potential outcomes of Lynch syndrome testing decisions and 3 associated cancers from 70 participants, representing a range of knowledge about and experiences with Lynch syndrome. RESULTS: Highest mean utilities were assigned to scenarios in which only the assessor's sibling had Lynch-associated colorectal cancer (ranging from 0.669 ± 0.231 to 0.760 ± 0.220). Utilities assigned to scenarios in which the assessor had Lynch-associated colorectal cancer ranged from 0.605 ± 0.252 to 0.682 ± 0.246, whereas the lowest mean utilities were assigned to 2 of the general cancer states (0.601 ± 0.238 and 0.593 ± 0.272 for colorectal and ovarian cancer respectively). Only 43% of the sample assigned higher values to undergoing Lynch testing and receiving negative results versus forgoing Lynch testing, whereas 50% assigned higher values to undergoing rather than forgoing surgery to prevent a subsequent cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing for Lynch syndrome, regardless of results, can have profound effects on quality of life; the utilities we collected can be used to incorporate these effects into cost-effectiveness analyses. Importantly, preferences for the potential outcomes of testing vary substantially, calling into question the extent to which patients would avail themselves of such testing if it were offered to them.

Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Testing has been advocated for all persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer to identify families with the Lynch syndrome, an autosomal dominant cancer-predisposition syndrome that is a paradigm for personalized medicine. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome, with attention to sex, age at screening, and differential effects for probands and relatives. DESIGN: Markov model that incorporated risk for colorectal, endometrial, and ovarian cancers. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: All persons with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and their relatives. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Third-party payer. INTERVENTION: Strategies based on clinical criteria, prediction algorithms, tumor testing, or up-front germline mutation testing, followed by tailored screening and risk-reducing surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES: Life-years, cancer cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: The benefit of all strategies accrued primarily to relatives with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome, particularly women, whose life expectancy could increase by approximately 4 years with hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy and adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. At current rates of germline testing, screening, and prophylactic surgery, the strategies reduced deaths from colorectal cancer by 7% to 42% and deaths from endometrial and ovarian cancer by 1% to 6%. Among tumor-testing strategies, immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,200 per life-year gained. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The number of relatives tested per proband was a critical determinant of both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, with testing of 3 to 4 relatives required for most strategies to meet a threshold of $50,000 per life-year gained. Immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing was preferred in 59% of iterations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis at a threshold of $100,000 per life-year gained. Screening for the Lynch syndrome with immunohistochemistry followed by BRAF mutation testing only up to age 70 years cost $44,000 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 60 years, and screening without an upper age limit cost $88,700 per incremental life-year gained compared with screening only up to age 70 years. LIMITATION: Other types of cancer, uncertain family pedigrees, and genetic variants of unknown significance were not considered. CONCLUSION: Widespread colorectal tumor testing to identify families with the Lynch syndrome could yield substantial benefits at acceptable costs, particularly for women with a mutation associated with the Lynch syndrome who begin regular screening and have risk-reducing surgery. The cost-effectiveness of such testing depends on the participation rate among relatives at risk for the Lynch syndrome. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Genetic discrimination by Australian insurance companies: a survey of consumer experiences.

We report previously undocumented evidence of genetic discrimination by Australian insurance companies, obtained through direct consumer reports. We surveyed 174 consumers with cancer-predisposing variants, recruited by cancer organisations Lynch Syndrome Australia and Pink Hope. Questions related to experiences accessing risk-rated insurance after genetic testing. Results indicate that both legal (permitted under current regulation) and illegal discrimination is occurring. Although some respondents had not applied for risk-rated insurance, or had insurance in place before genetic testing (n = 100), those seeking new policies (n = 74) commonly experienced difficulties obtaining insurance (86%, 64/74). Of those experiencing difficulties, 50% (32/64) had no prior history or symptoms of cancer, and had undertaken risk reduction through surveillance and/or preventative surgery. Seventy-seven percent (49/64) reported difficulties related to life insurance. Follow-up telephone interviews with four respondents further described cases of apparent illegal breaches. All reports of discrimination identified were, to our knowledge, previously unreported in the literature. The number of cases suggests a systemic problem with the Australian life insurance industry. We support calls for government oversight of the inherently conflicted model of industry self-regulation in Australia, and an immediate ban on the use of genetic test results in insurance underwriting.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of genetic diagnostic strategies for Lynch syndrome in Italy.

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant condition caused by pathogenic variants in mismatch repair (MMR) genes that predispose individuals to different malignancies, such as colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer. Current guidelines recommended testing for LS in individuals with newly diagnosed CRC to reduce cancer morbidity and mortality in relatives. Economic evaluations in support of such approach, however, are not available in Italy. We developed a decision-analytic model to analyze the cost-effectiveness of LS screening from the perspective of the Italian National Health System. Three testing strategies: the sequencing of all MMR genes without prior tumor analysis (Strategy 1), a sequential IHC and MS-MLPA analysis (Strategy 2), and an age-targeted strategy with a revised Bethesda criteria assessment before IHC and methylation-specific MLPA for patients ≥ than 70 years old (Strategy 3) were analyzed and compared to the "no testing" strategy. Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in relatives after colonoscopy, aspirin prophylaxis and an intensive gynecological surveillance were estimated through a Markov model. Assuming a CRC incidence rate of 0.09% and a share of patients affected by LS equal to 2.81%, the number of detected pathogenic variants among CRC cases ranges, in a given year, between 910 and 1167 depending on the testing strategy employed. The testing strategies investigated, provided one-time to the entire eligible population (CRC patients), were associated with an overall cost ranging between €1,753,059.93-€10,388,000.00. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the Markov model ranged from €941.24 /QALY to €1,681.93 /QALY, thus supporting that "universal testing" versus "no testing" is cost-effective, but not necessarily in comparison with age-targeted strategies. This is the first economic evaluation on different testing strategies for LS in Italy. The results might support the introduction of cost-effective recommendations for LS screening in Italy.

Evaluating the impact of universal Lynch syndrome screening in a publicly funded healthcare system.

PURPOSE: Referrals for Lynch syndrome (LS) assessment have traditionally been based on personal and family medical history. The introduction of universal screening practices has allowed for referrals based on immunohistochemistry tests for mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression. This study aims to characterize the effect of universal screening in a publicly funded healthcare system with comparison to patients referred by traditional criteria, from January 2012 to March 2017. METHODS: Patient files from the time of initiation of universal screening from 2012 to 2017 were reviewed. Patients were sorted into two groups: (a) universally screened and (b) referred by traditional methods. Mutation detection rates, analysis of traditional testing criteria met, and cascade carrier testing were evaluated. RESULTS: The mutation detection rate of the universal screening group was higher than the traditionally referred group (45/228 (19.7%) vs 50/390 (12.5%), P = .05), though each were able to identify unique patients. An analysis of testing criteria met by each patient showed that half of referred patients from the universal screening group could not meet any traditional testing criteria. CONCLUSION: The implementation of universal screening in a publicly funded system will increase efficiency in detecting patients with LS. The resources available for genetic testing and counseling may be more limited in public systems, thus inclusion of secondary screening with BRAF and MLH1 promoter hypermethylation testing is key to further optimizing efficiency.

Total abdominal colectomy is cost-effective in treating colorectal cancer in patients with genetically diagnosed Lynch Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS) has a 80% lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer and metachronous cancer. No studies have examined the quality adjusted life expectancy after SEG or TAC for LS patients, which this study was aiming for. If TAC offers a higher quality adjusted life year (QALY) to SEG in LS patients, preoperative diagnosis of LS is critical as it alters the recommended surgical procedure. METHODS: A Markov decision tree was constructed using Treeage software to compare QALY of LS patients following SEG or TAC. Probabilities, cost, and utility were obtained from literature. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed. RESULTS: TAC dominates SEG as both the life-saving and cost-saving strategy. TAC dominated SEG on QALY (17.80 vs 17.13 QALY) for a cohort of LS patients diagnosed at an average of 30 year old and followed every 2 years after initial surgery. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that TAC as the primary surgical option for LS patients diagnosed with Stage I-III colon cancer is cost-effective. Further cost-effectiveness study is recommended to include extra-colonic malignancies in LS patients.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of reflex testing for Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer in the UK setting.

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.

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.

Detection of BRAF V600E mutation in colorectal cancer: comparison of automatic sequencing and real-time chemistry methodology.

Mutation V600E of BRAF, a kinase-encoding gene from the RAS/RAF/MAPK pathway, in colorectal carcinoma (CRC) suggests a sporadic origin of the disease, providing an exclusion criterion for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Here we describe detection of this mutation by real-time chemistry TaqMan MGB probes, confirmed by direct DNA sequencing as the gold standard. DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded tissue from 112 tumors obtained from the EPICOLON study. Seventy-two tumors were CRC with defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR; microsatellite instability and/or loss of protein expression by immunohistochemical analysis), and 40 were proficient MMR controls. BRAF mutation was detected in 20/72 (27.8%) CRC with defective MMR and in 3/40 (7.5%) proficient MMR controls (P = 0.011). BRAF mutation was detected in 19/51 (37.3%) tumors with loss of MLH1 expression and in none of the tumors with loss of MSH2 expression (0/13). BRAF mutation was not found in cases with germline mutation of MLH1 (4/112) or MSH2 (3/112) genes. The sensitivity and specificity of our real-time chemistry were both 100% for detecting the V600E mutation. Because real-time chemistry methodology has advantages in cost, time, and labor, we consider it a valuable alternative to automatic direct sequencing, particularly for serial measurements.