Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022
A validation of models for prediction of pathogenic variants in mismatch repair genes.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка 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.
Shyr Cathy, Blackford Amanda L, Huang Theodore, Ke Jianfeng, Ouardaoui Nofal, Trippa Lorenzo, Syngal Sapna, Ukaegbu Chinedu, Uno Hajime, Nafa Khedoudja, Stadler Zsofia K, Offit Kenneth, Amos Christopher I, Lynch Patrick M, Chen Sining, Giardiello Francis M, Buchanan Daniel D, Hopper John L, Jenkins Mark A, Southey Melissa C, Win Aung Ko, Figueiredo Jane C, Braun Danielle, Parmigiani Giovanni
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Models used to predict the probability of an individual having a pathogenic homozygous or heterozygous variant in a mismatch repair gene, such as MMRpro, are widely used. Recently, MMRpro was updated with new colorectal cancer penetrance estimates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the predictive performance of MMRpro and other models for individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer.
METHODS: We performed a validation study of 4 models, Leiden, MMRpredict, PREMM5, and MMRpro, using 784 members of clinic-based families from the United States. Predicted probabilities were compared with germline testing results and evaluated for discrimination, calibration, and predictive accuracy. We analyzed several strategies to combine models and improve predictive performance.
RESULTS: MMRpro with additional tumor information (MMRpro+) and PREMM5 outperformed the other models in discrimination and predictive accuracy. MMRpro+ was the best calibrated with an observed to expected ratio of 0.98 (95% CI = 0.89-1.08). The combination models showed improvement over PREMM5 and performed similar to MMRpro+.
CONCLUSION: MMRpro+ and PREMM5 performed well in predicting the probability of having a pathogenic homozygous or heterozygous variant in a mismatch repair gene. They serve as useful clinical decision tools for identifying individuals who would benefit greatly from screening and prevention strategies.
METHODS: We performed a validation study of 4 models, Leiden, MMRpredict, PREMM5, and MMRpro, using 784 members of clinic-based families from the United States. Predicted probabilities were compared with germline testing results and evaluated for discrimination, calibration, and predictive accuracy. We analyzed several strategies to combine models and improve predictive performance.
RESULTS: MMRpro with additional tumor information (MMRpro+) and PREMM5 outperformed the other models in discrimination and predictive accuracy. MMRpro+ was the best calibrated with an observed to expected ratio of 0.98 (95% CI = 0.89-1.08). The combination models showed improvement over PREMM5 and performed similar to MMRpro+.
CONCLUSION: MMRpro+ and PREMM5 performed well in predicting the probability of having a pathogenic homozygous or heterozygous variant in a mismatch repair gene. They serve as useful clinical decision tools for identifying individuals who would benefit greatly from screening and prevention strategies.