Improving identification of lynch syndrome patients: A comparison of research data with clinical records. Issue 12 (11th January 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tan, Yen Y.; McGaughran, Julie; Ferguson, Kaltin; Walsh, Michael D.; Buchanan, Daniel D.; Young, Joanne P.; Webb, Penelope M.; Obermair, Andreas; Spurdle, Amanda B.
• Is Part Of: International journal of cancer. Volume 132:Issue 12(2013:Jun. 15)
• Page Start: 2876
• Page End: 2883
• Publication Date: 2013-01-11
• Subjects: Cancer -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Prevention -- Periodicals; 616.994
• DOI: 10.1002/ijc.27978
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-7136

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" xml:lang="en"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Current evidence suggests poor identification and referral of Lynch syndrome patients. This study evaluated the strategies by which patients with endometrial cancer were referred to genetics services. Data from clinic‐based patients with endometrial cancer enrolled through the Australian National Endometrial Cancer population‐based research study with detailed family history information were analyzed. The Amsterdam II criteria, the revised Bethesda guidelines, and criteria adapted for this study was assessed using personal/family history information. The percentages of patients referred and who could have been referred to genetics services, and the performance of each criterion for identifying possible mismatch‐repair (MMR) gene mutation carriers, based on tumor MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC), were determined. Research data indicated that 236/397(59%) of patients with endometrial cancer had family/personal history of cancer, including 14 (4%) who fulfilled Amsterdam II criteria. Family history information was noted in the hospital records for only 61(15%) patients, including 7/14 (50%) of patients meeting Amsterdam criteria, and always less extensively than that recorded in the research setting. Only 13 patients (two meeting Amsterdam criteria) were referred for genetic assessment. Of 58 patients with tumor MMR protein‐IHC loss, the Amsterdam criteria and Bethesda guidelines identified only three and 34% of these possible germline mutation carriers, respectively. Greater sensitivity (60%) was obtained using a single criterion proposed by our study, ≥2 first‐degree or second‐degree relatives reporting Lynch cancers. Hospital records indicate poor recognition of family history. Application of research methods show improved identification and may facilitate appropriate referrals of endometrial cancer patients with possible Lynch syndrome.</p> </abstract>