The CRISP colorectal cancer risk prediction tool: an exploratory study using simulated consultations in Australian primary care

BACKGROUND: In Australia, screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) with colonoscopy is meant to be reserved for people at increased risk, however, currently there is a mismatch between individuals' risk of CRC and the type of CRC screening they receive. This paper describes the development and optimisation of a Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction tool ('CRISP') for use in primary care. The aim of the CRISP tool is to increase risk-appropriate CRC screening. METHODS: CRISP development was informed by previous experience with developing risk tools for use in primary care and a systematic review of the evidence. A CRISP prototype was used in simulated consultations by general practitioners (GPs) with actors as patients. GPs were interviewed to explore their experience of using CRISP, and practice nurses (PNs) and practice managers (PMs) were interviewed after a demonstration of CRISP. Transcribed interviews and video footage of the 'consultations' were qualitatively analyzed. Themes arising from the data were mapped onto Normalization Process Theory (NPT). RESULTS: Fourteen GPs, nine PNs and six PMs were recruited from 12 clinics. Results were described using the four constructs of NPT: 1) Coherence: Clinicians understood the rationale behind CRISP, particularly since they were familiar with using risk tools for other conditions; 2) Cognitive participation: GPs welcomed the opportunity CRISP provided to discuss healthy and unhealthy behaviors with their patients, but many GPs challenged the screening recommendation generated by CRISP; 3) Collective Action: CRISP disrupted clinician-patient flow if the GP was less comfortable with computers. GP consultation time was a major implementation barrier and overall consensus was that PNs have more capacity and time to use CRISP effectively; 4) Reflexive monitoring: Limited systematic monitoring of new interventions is a potential barrier to the sustainable embedding of CRISP. CONCLUSIONS: CRISP has the potential to improve risk-appropriate CRC screening in primary care but was considered more likely to be successfully implemented as a nurse-led intervention.This study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Centre for Research Excellence grant (APP1042021). M Pirotta is supported by an NHMRC Career Development Fellowship. JD Emery is supported by an NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship. FM Walter is supported by a NIHR Clinician Scientist award

Body mass index in early adulthood and colorectal cancer risk for carriers and non-carriers of germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes

BACKGROUND: Carriers of germline mutations in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes have a high risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), but the modifiers of this risk are not well established. We estimated an association between body mass index (BMI) in early adulthood and subsequent risk of CRC for carriers and, as a comparison, estimated the association for non-carriers. METHODS: A weighted Cox regression was used to analyse height and weight at 20 years reported by 1324 carriers of MMR gene mutations (500 MLH1, 648 MSH2, 117 MSH6 and 59 PMS2) and 1219 non-carriers from the Colon Cancer Family Registry. RESULTS: During 122,304 person-years of observation, we observed diagnoses of CRC for 659 carriers (50%) and 36 non-carriers (3%). For carriers, the risk of CRC increased by 30% for each 5 kg m(-2) increment in BMI in early adulthood (hazard ratio, HR: 1.30; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.08-1.58; P=0.01), and increased by 64% for non-carriers (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.02-2.64; P=0.04) after adjusting for sex, country, cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking (and the MMR gene that was mutated in carriers). The difference in HRs for carriers and non-carriers was not statistically significant (P=0.50). For MLH1 and PMS2 (MutLα heterodimer) mutation carriers combined, the corresponding increase was 36% (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.05-1.76; P=0.02). For MSH2 and MSH6 (MutSα heterodimer) mutation carriers combined, the HR was 1.26 (95% CI: 0.96-1.65; P=0.09). There was no significant difference between the HRs for MutLα and MutSα heterodimer carriers (P=0.56). CONCLUSION: Body mass index in early adulthood is positively associated with risk of CRC for MMR gene mutation carriers and non-carriers

PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM rare variants and cancer risk: data from COGS

Background: The rarity of mutations in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM make it difficult to estimate precisely associated cancer risks. Population-based family studies have provided evidence that at least some of these mutations are associated with breast cancer risk as high as those associated with rare BRCA2 mutations. We aimed to estimate the relative risks associated with specific rare variants in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM via a multicentre case-control study.Methods: We genotyped 10 rare mutations using the custom iCOGS array: PALB2 c.1592delT, c.2816T&gt;G and c.3113G&gt;A, CHEK2c.349A&gt;G, c.538C&gt;T, c.715G&gt;A, c.1036C&gt;T, c.1312G&gt;T, and c.1343T&gt;G and ATM c.7271T&gt;G. We assessed associations with breast cancer risk (42 671 cases and 42 164 controls), as well as prostate (22 301 cases and 22 320 controls) and ovarian (14 542 cases and 23 491 controls) cancer risk, for each variant.Results: For European women, strong evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for PALB2 c.1592delT OR 3.44 (95% CI 1.39 to 8.52, p=7.1×10−5), PALB2 c.3113G&gt;A OR 4.21 (95% CI 1.84 to 9.60, p=6.9×10−8) and ATM c.7271T&gt;G OR 11.0 (95% CI 1.42 to 85.7, p=0.0012). We also found evidence of association with breast cancer risk for three variants in CHEK2, c.349A&gt;G OR 2.26 (95% CI 1.29 to 3.95), c.1036C&gt;T OR 5.06 (95% CI 1.09 to 23.5) and c.538C&gt;T OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.67) (p≤0.017). Evidence for prostate cancer risk was observed for CHEK2 c.1343T&gt;G OR 3.03 (95% CI 1.53 to 6.03, p=0.0006) for African men and CHEK2 c.1312G&gt;T OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.06 to 4.63, p=0.030) for European men. No evidence of association with ovarian cancer was found for any of these variants.Conclusions: This report adds to accumulating evidence that at least some variants in these genes are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer that is clinically important.</p

Criteria and prediction models for mismatch repair gene mutations: a review

One of the strongest predictors of colorectal cancer risk is carrying a germline mutation in a DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene. Once identified, mutation carriers can be recommended for intensive screening that will substantially reduce their high colorectal cancer risk. Conversely, the relatives of carriers identified as non-carriers can be relieved of the burden of intensive screening. Criteria and prediction models that identify likely mutation carriers are needed for cost-effective, targeted, germline testing for MMR gene mutation. We reviewed 12 criteria/guidelines and 8 prediction models (Leiden, Amsterdam-plus, Amsterdam-alternative, MMRpro, PREMM1,2,6, MMRpredict, Associazione Italiana per lo studio della Familiarità ed Ereditarietà dei tumori Gastrointestinali (AIFEG) and the Myriad Genetics Prevalence table) for identifying mutation carriers. While criteria are only used to identify individuals with colorectal cancer (yes/no for screening followed by germline testing), all prediction models except MMRpredict and Myriad tables can predict the probability of carrying mutations for individuals with or without colorectal cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis of the discrimination performance of 17 studies that validated the prediction models. The pooled estimate for the area under curve was 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.88) for MMRpro, 0.81 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.88) for MMRpredict, 0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.88) for PREMM, and 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91) for Leiden model. Given the high degree of overlap in the CIs, we cannot state that one model has a higher discrimination than any of the others. Overall, the existing statistical models have been shown to be sensitive and specific (at a 5% cut-off) in predicting MMR gene mutation carriers. Future models may need to: provide prediction of PMS2 mutations, take into account a wider range of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers when assessing family history, and be applicable to all people irrespective of any cancer diagnosis

The Impact of a Comprehensive Risk Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer on a Population Screening Program

Background In many countries, population colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is based on age and family history, though more precise risk prediction could better target screening. We examined the impact of a CRC risk prediction model (incorporating age, sex, lifestyle, genomic, and family history factors) to target screening under several feasible screening scenarios. Methods We estimated the model’s predicted CRC risk distribution in the Australian population. Predicted CRC risks were categorized into screening recommendations under 3 proposed scenarios to compare with current recommendations: 1) highly tailored, 2) 3 risk categories, and 3) 4 sex-specific risk categories. Under each scenario, for 35- to 74-year-olds, we calculated the number of CRC screens by immunochemical fecal occult blood testing (iFOBT) and colonoscopy and the proportion of predicted CRCs over 10 years in each screening group. Results Currently, 1.1% of 35- to 74-year-olds are recommended screening colonoscopy and 56.2% iFOBT, and 5.7% and 83.2% of CRCs over 10 years were predicted to occur in these groups, respectively. For the scenarios, 1) colonoscopy was recommended to 8.1% and iFOBT to 37.5%, with 36.1% and 50.1% of CRCs in each group; 2) colonoscopy was recommended to 2.4% and iFOBT to 56.0%, with 13.2% and 76.9% of cancers in each group; and 3) colonoscopy was recommended to 5.0% and iFOBT to 54.2%, with 24.5% and 66.5% of cancers in each group. Conclusions A highly tailored CRC screening scenario results in many fewer screens but more cancers in those unscreened. Category-based scenarios may provide a good balance between number of screens and cancers detected and are simpler to implement

Breast cancer risk for Korean women with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2

The average age-specific cumulative risk (penetrance) of breast cancer has been studied for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers living in Western countries, but not for those living in East Asian countries where the population breast cancer incidence is lower. From 2007 to 2011, the Korean Hereditary Breast Cancer study identified 151 BRCA1 and 225 BRCA2 mutation-carrying families from family cancer clinics. We estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for female carriers relative to the population, and hence the penetrance, using a modified segregation analysis of cancer family histories conditioned on ascertainment. The breast cancer HR estimates [95 % confidence interval (CI)] for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers were 18 (3-103) and 11 (5-27), respectively. The breast cancer penetrance estimates (95 % CI) to age 70 years were 49 % (11-98) and 35 % (16-65) for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. The breast cancer HR and penetrance estimates were similar for Korean and Western women (all P > 0.4). The point estimates of breast cancer penetrance were similar to age 50 years, though less for Korean carriers at older ages. Breast cancer risk for Korean and Western mutation carriers might reflect underlying population risks which in turn likely reflect differences in environmental and lifestyle factors. This raises the possibility of identifying modifiers of cancer risk for carriers with implications for prevention