JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024
Population-Level Identification of Patients With Lynch Syndrome for Clinical Care, Quality Improvement, and Research.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sharaf Ravi N, Udaltsova Natalia, Li Dan, Pai Rish K, Sinha Soham, Li Zixuan, Corley Douglas A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Identification of those at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes using electronic health record (EHR) data sources is important for clinical care, quality improvement, and research. We describe diagnostic processes, previously seldom reported, for a common hereditary cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome (LS), using EHR data within a community-based, multicenter, demographically diverse health system.
METHODS: Within a retrospective cohort enrolled between 2015 and 2020 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we assessed electronic diagnostic domains for LS including (1) family history of LS-associated cancer; (2) personal history of LS-associated cancer; (3) LS screening via mismatch repair deficiency (MMRD) testing of newly diagnosed malignancy; (4) germline genetic test results; and (5) clinician-entered diagnostic codes for LS. We calculated proportions and overlap for each diagnostic domain descriptively.
RESULTS: Among 5.8 million individuals, (1) 28,492 (0.49%) had a family history of LS-associated cancer of whom 3,635 (13%) underwent genetic testing; (2) 100,046 (1.7%) had a personal history of a LS-associated cancer; and (3) 8,711 (0.1%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer of whom 7,533 (86%) underwent MMRD screening and of the positive screens (486), 130 (27%) underwent germline testing. One thousand seven hundred and fifty-seven (0.03%) were diagnosed with endometrial cancer of whom 1,613 (92%) underwent MMRD screening and of the 195 who screened positive, 55 (28%) underwent genetic testing. (4) 30,790 (0.05%) had LS germline genetic testing with 707 (0.01%) testing positive; and (5) 1,273 (0.02%) had a clinician-entered diagnosis of LS.
CONCLUSION: It is feasible to electronically characterize the diagnostic processes of LS. No single data source comprehensively identifies all LS carriers. There is underutilization of LS genetic testing for those eligible and underdiagnosis of LS. Our work informs similar efforts in other settings for hereditary cancer syndromes.
METHODS: Within a retrospective cohort enrolled between 2015 and 2020 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we assessed electronic diagnostic domains for LS including (1) family history of LS-associated cancer; (2) personal history of LS-associated cancer; (3) LS screening via mismatch repair deficiency (MMRD) testing of newly diagnosed malignancy; (4) germline genetic test results; and (5) clinician-entered diagnostic codes for LS. We calculated proportions and overlap for each diagnostic domain descriptively.
RESULTS: Among 5.8 million individuals, (1) 28,492 (0.49%) had a family history of LS-associated cancer of whom 3,635 (13%) underwent genetic testing; (2) 100,046 (1.7%) had a personal history of a LS-associated cancer; and (3) 8,711 (0.1%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer of whom 7,533 (86%) underwent MMRD screening and of the positive screens (486), 130 (27%) underwent germline testing. One thousand seven hundred and fifty-seven (0.03%) were diagnosed with endometrial cancer of whom 1,613 (92%) underwent MMRD screening and of the 195 who screened positive, 55 (28%) underwent genetic testing. (4) 30,790 (0.05%) had LS germline genetic testing with 707 (0.01%) testing positive; and (5) 1,273 (0.02%) had a clinician-entered diagnosis of LS.
CONCLUSION: It is feasible to electronically characterize the diagnostic processes of LS. No single data source comprehensively identifies all LS carriers. There is underutilization of LS genetic testing for those eligible and underdiagnosis of LS. Our work informs similar efforts in other settings for hereditary cancer syndromes.