Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24903654›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2015

Selective Versus Universal Screening for Lynch Syndrome: A Six-Year Clinical Experience.

Trilokesh D Kidambi, Amie Blanco, Megan Myers, Peggy Conrad, Kate Loranger, Jonathan P Terdiman

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Trilokesh D KidambiDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, 1701 Divisadero, Suite 120, San Francisco, CA, 94115, USA, Trilokesh.Kidambi@ucsf.edu.
Amie Blanco
Megan Myers
Peggy Conrad
Kate Loranger
Jonathan P Terdiman
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) and confers increased risk of other cancers. Identification of patients improves morbidity and mortality. Screening tumors for absent mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a recommended approach. Despite guidelines advocating universal screening, significant variation in clinical practice exists. AIMS/

methodsA retrospective study of two different IHC-based Lynch syndrome screening protocols at an urban, university hospital was performed. Outcomes from a "selective" screening strategy utilized from August 2007-July 2010 on CRC tumors from patients with high-risk features were compared with a "universal" strategy of screening all CRC tumors from July 2010-August 2013. Positively screened patients were referred for genetic counseling and offered germline testing.

resultsA total of 392 patients with CRC were screened: 107 selectively and 285 universally. The prevalence of Lynch syndrome was 3.1 %, with no difference by strategy. There was a trend (p = 0.06) toward fewer universally screened patients agreeing to genetic counseling compared with those selectively screened. Selective criteria failed to identify one of eight cases of Lynch syndrome from the universal group, though the universal strategy screened 166 additional tumors to find this additional patient.

conclusionsSelective screening for Lynch syndrome has similar outcomes as universal screening in terms of identifying Lynch syndrome, despite screening far fewer patients. In addition, fewer eligible patients in our study agreed to undergo genetic counseling and germline testing than in prior studies. These lower rates may better reflect uptake of these services in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AdultAgedClinical ProtocolsColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisDNA Mismatch RepairEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansImmunohistochemistryMaleMass ScreeningMicrosatellite InstabilityMiddle AgedNuclear ProteinsPatient SelectionNuclear Proteins

Identifiers

PMID24903654
OpenAlexW2017544969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.