Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26811195›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2016

Targeted next-generation sequencing of 22 mismatch repair genes identifies Lynch syndrome families.

Bente A Talseth-Palmer, Denis C Bauer, Wenche Sjursen, Tiffany J Evans, Mary McPhillips, Anthony Proietto, Geoffrey Otton, Allan D Spigelman, Rodney J Scott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Diagnostics of Mutations in MMR/Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Novel Implications in Molecular Diagnosis of Lynch Syndrome.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2017
    Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Bente A Talseth-PalmerSchool of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Denis C BauerCSIRO Digital Productivity, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Wenche SjursenDepartment of Laboratory Medicine Children's and Women's Health, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Tiffany J EvansSchool of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Mary McPhillipsHunter Area Pathology Service, Pathology North, Hunter New England Area Health, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Anthony ProiettoHunter Centre for Gynaecological Cancer, Hunter New England Area Health, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Geoffrey OttonHunter Centre for Gynaecological Cancer, Hunter New England Area Health, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Allan D SpigelmanHunter Family Cancer Service, Hunter New England Area Health, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Rodney J ScottSchool of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Causative germline mutations in mismatch repair (MMR) genes can only be identified in ~50% of families with a clinical diagnosis of the inherited colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC)/Lynch syndrome (LS). Identification of these patients are critical as they are at substantially increased risk of developing multiple primary tumors, mainly colorectal and endometrial cancer (EC), occurring at a young age. This demonstrates the need to develop new and/or more thorough mutation detection approaches. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used to screen 22 genes involved in the DNA MMR pathway in constitutional DNA from 14 HNPCC and 12 sporadic EC patients, plus 2 positive controls. Several softwares were used for analysis and functional annotation. We identified 5 exonic indel variants, 42 exonic nonsynonymous single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and 1 intronic variant of significance. Three of these variants were class 5 (pathogenic) or class 4 (likely pathogenic), 5 were class 3 (uncertain clinical relevance) and 40 were classified as variants of unknown clinical significance. In conclusion, we have identified two LS families from the sporadic EC patients, one without a family history of cancer, supporting the notion for universal MMR screening of EC patients. In addition, we have detected three novel class 3 variants in EC cases. We have, in addition discovered a polygenic interaction which is the most likely cause of cancer development in a HNPCC patient that could explain previous inconsistent results reported on an intronic EXO1 variant.

Indexed as

AdultAgedColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisDNA Mismatch RepairDNA, NeoplasmEarly Detection of CancerEndometrial NeoplasmsExonsFemaleGenes, NeoplasmGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic VariationGerm-Line MutationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansIntronsDNA, NeoplasmCancer geneticscolorectal cancerinherited cancer

Identifiers

PMID26811195
PMCPMC4864822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.