Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29300371›Full record

SynthesisGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2018

Which Lynch syndrome screening programs could be implemented in the "real world"? A systematic review of economic evaluations.

Marco Di Marco, Elvira DAndrea, Nikola Panic, Valentina Baccolini, Giuseppe Migliara, Carolina Marzuillo, Corrado De Vito, Roberta Pastorino, Stefania Boccia, Paolo Villari

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Diagnostics of Mutations in MMR/Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Marco Di MarcoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. marcodimarco@live.it.
Elvira DAndreaDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Nikola PanicUniversity Clinic "Dr Dragisa Misovic-Dedinje", Belgrade, Serbia.
Valentina BaccoliniDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe MigliaraDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Carolina MarzuilloDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Corrado De VitoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Roberta PastorinoSection of Hygiene, Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Stefania BocciaSection of Hygiene, Institute of Public Health, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Fondazione Policlinico "A. Gemelli", Rome, Italy.
Paolo VillariDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITHarvard University · USUniversity Hospital Center Dr Dragiša Mišović · RS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLynch 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."

methodsWe 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.

resultsOverall, 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.

conclusionUniversal or <70 years-age-targeted CRC-based LS screening programs are cost-effective and should be implemented in the "real world."

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsColorectal NeoplasmsColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerGenetic TestingHumansMass ScreeningProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafBRAF protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

Identifiers

PMID29300371
PMCPMC8660650
OpenAlexW2781719860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.