Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33426601›Full record

SynthesisFamilial cancer2022

Comparison of universal screening in major lynch-associated tumors: a systematic review of literature.

George Kunnackal John, Vipin Das Villgran, Christine Caufield-Noll, Francis M Giardiello

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Familial cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Outcomes of 'in-house' genetic testing within a specialist hereditary colorectal cancer registry.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Looking beyond the surface: Muir Torre syndrome.Archive of clinical cases · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

George Kunnackal JohnClinical Assistant Professor, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 511 Idlewild Ave, Easton, MD, 21601, USA. george.john@umm.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-0595-5434
Vipin Das VillgranPulmonary and Critical Care Fellow, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA, 15212, USA.
Christine Caufield-NollMedical Librarian, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, 21224, USA.
Francis M GiardielloDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Funding

Tumor Antigens for Individual Signatures and TherapyP50CA062924 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI JAFFEE, ELIZABETH M. · 1993 to 2022
$54.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA062924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lynch syndrome (LS) is associated with an increased lifetime risk of several cancers including colorectal (CRC), endometrial (EC), ovarian (OC), urinary (UT) and sebaceous tumors (ST). The benefit for universal screening in CRC and EC is well known. However, this benefit in other major lynch-associated tumors is unclear. We performed a systematic review of all published articles in the MEDLINE database between 2005 to 2017 to identify studies performing universal screening for LS in unselected CRC, EC, OC, UT and ST. All cases with MSI-H (instability in two or more markers) or missing one or more proteins on IHC testing were considered screening positive. Cases with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation or BRAF mutation positive were considered to have somatic mutations. A total of 3788 articles were identified in MEDLINE yielding 129 study arms from 113 studies. The overall pooled yield of universal LS screening and germline mismatch gene mutation was significantly different across the major LS-associated tumors (Mann Whitney test, p < 0.001). The pooled screening yield was highest in ST [52.5% (355/676), 95% CI 48.74-56.26%] followed by EC [22.65% (1142/5041), 95% CI 21.54-23.86%], CRC [11.9% (5649/47,545), 95% CI 11.61-12.19%], OC [11.29% (320/2833), 95% CI 10.13-12.47%] and UT [11.2% (31/276), 95% CI 7.48-14.92%]. ST also had the highest pooled germline positivity for mismatch repair gene mutation [18.8%, 33/176, 95%CI 13.03-24.57], followed by EC [2.6% (97/3765), 95% CI 2.09-3.11], CRC [1.8% (682/37,220), 95% CI 1.66-1.94%], UT [1.8%(3/164), 95% CI - 0.24-3.83%] and OC [0.83%(25/2983), 95% CI 0.48-1.12%]. LS screening in EC yielded significantly higher somatic mutations compared to CRC [pooled percentage 16.94% [(538/3176), 95%CI 15.60-18.20%] vs. 5.23% [(1639/26,152), 95% CI 4.93-5.47%], Mann Whitney test, p < 0.0001. Universal LS testing should be routinely performed in OC, UT and STs in addition to CRC and EC. Our findings also support consideration for IHC and somatic mutation testing before germline testing in EC due to higher prevalence of somatic mutations as well as germline testing in all patients with ST. Our results have implications for future design of LS screening programs and further studies are needed to assess the cost effectiveness and burden on genetic counselling services with expanded universal testing for LS.

Indexed as

Colorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisEndometrial NeoplasmsDNA Mismatch RepairFemaleGenetic TestingGerm-Line MutationHumansMass ScreeningMicrosatellite InstabilityLynch syndromeUniversal screening

Identifiers

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.