ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2001
Estimating the efficacy and efficiency of cascade genetic screening.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of theory-informed strategies used in interventions fostering family genetic risk communication.Patient education and counseling · 2022Pooled it
- Attitudes and opinions of pregnant women who are not offered cystic fibrosis carrier screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2014Trial
- Evaluating the impact of accessible low-cost pediatric genetic testing on underserved communities in the United States.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023Article
- Twenty-Five Years of Contemplating Genotype-Based Hereditary Hemochromatosis Population Screening.Genes · 2022Review
- An Examination of the Ethical and Legal Limits in Implementing "Traceback Testing" for Deceased Patients.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2022Article
- Family-level impact of genetic testing: integrating health economics and ethical, legal, and social implications.Personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Frequency of Pathogenic Germline Variants in Cancer-Susceptibility Genes in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
- What improves the likelihood of people receiving genetic test results communicating to their families about genetic risk?Patient education and counseling · 2021Article
- Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: patient recommendations for improved risk communication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Frequency of Pathogenic Germline Variants in Cancer-Susceptibility Genes in Patients With Osteosarcoma.JAMA oncology · 2020Article
- Assessing the implications of positive genomic screening results.Personalized medicine · 2020Article
- Lung function: population epidemiology and concordance in Australian children aged 11-12 years and their parents.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Regional Body Fat Changes and Metabolic Complications in Children With Dunnigan Lipodystrophy-Causing LMNA Variants.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2019Article
- Modified capture-recapture estimates of the number of families with Lynch syndrome in Central Ohio.Familial cancer · 2019Article
- Rare single gene disorders: estimating baseline prevalence and outcomes worldwide.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- The genetics and screening of familial hypercholesterolaemia.Journal of biomedical science · 2016Review
- Addressing key issues in the consanguinity-related risk of autosomal recessive disorders in consanguineous communities: lessons from a qualitative study of British Pakistanis.Journal of community genetics · 2016Article
- Aligning policy to promote cascade genetic screening for prevention and early diagnosis of heritable diseases.Journal of genetic counseling · 2015Article
- Communication and technology in genetic counseling for familial cancer.Clinical genetics · 2014Review
- Further evidence of mutational heterogeneity of the XPC gene in Tunisian families: a spectrum of private and ethnic specific mutations.BioMed research international · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Screening for genetic variants that predispose individuals or their offspring to disease may be performed at the general population level or may instead be targeted at the relatives of previously identified carriers. The latter strategy has come to be known as "cascade genetic screening." Since the carrier risk of close relatives of known carriers is generally higher than the population risk, cascade screening is more efficient than population screening, in the sense that fewer individuals have to be genotyped per detected carrier. The efficacy of cascade screening, as measured by the overall proportion of carriers detected in a given population, is, however, lower than that of population-wide screening, and the respective inclusion rates vary according to the population frequency and mode of inheritance of the predisposing variants. For dominant mutations, we have developed equations that allow the inclusion rates of cascade screening to be calculated in an iterative fashion, depending upon screening depth and penetrance. For recessive mutations, we derived only equations for the screening of siblings and the children of patients. Owing to their mathematical complexity, it was necessary to study more extended screening strategies by simulation. Cascade screening turned out to result in low inclusion rates (<1%) when aimed at the identification of heterozygous carriers of rare recessive variants. Considerably higher rates are achievable, however, when screening is performed to detect covert homozygotes for frequent recessive mutations with reduced penetrance. This situation is exemplified by hereditary hemochromatosis, for which up to 40% of at-risk individuals may be identifiable through screening of first- to third-degree relatives of overt carriers (i.e., patients); the efficiency of this screening strategy was found to be approximately 50 times higher than that of population-wide screening. For dominant mutations, inclusion rates of cascade screening were estimated to be higher than for recessive variants. Thus, some 80% of all carriers of the factor V Leiden mutation would be detected if screening were to be targeted specifically at first- to third-degree relatives of patients with venous thrombosis. The relative cost efficiency of cascade as compared with population-wide screening (i.e., the overall savings in the extra managerial cost of the condition) is also likely to be higher for dominant than for recessive mutations. This notwithstanding, once screening has become cost-effective at the population level, it can be expected that cascade screening would only transiently represent an economically viable option.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.