Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Protocol

The prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer: a systematic review protocol

Authors: Neil A. J. Ryan, Dominic Blake, Marcus Cabrera-Dandy, Mark A. Glaire, D. Gareth Evans, Emma J. Crosbie

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Lynch syndrome is the most common inherited cancer syndrome, which predisposes individuals to a number of different cancers, principally colorectal and endometrial cancer. The early diagnosis of Lynch syndrome enables colorectal surveillance, which has been shown to save lives through the detection and removal of premalignant polyps and earlier detection of invasive disease. Endometrial cancer, which is often the sentinel cancer in women, provides an opportunity to diagnose Lynch syndrome and thus enable colorectal surveillance as well as the cascade testing for Lynch syndrome in other family members. These potential benefits have led to a call for the universal screening of women with endometrial cancer for Lynch syndrome, a practice that is now commonplace in colorectal cancer. Healthcare providers and clinicians are however restricted by insufficient knowledge about the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer, with estimates varying as widely as 1–10%. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review with a meta-analysis of the current literature base in order to estimate the prevalence of Lynch syndrome among women with endometrial cancer to inform this discussion.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Methodology Register, NHS Health and Technology Assessment Database and the Web of Science will be systematically searched for relevant studies via the Ovid platform. Two authors will review the titles and abstracts independently, with discrepancy settled by a third author. Data extraction will be completed to record demographic, pathological and clinical data, as well as the diagnostic methods used for estimating the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer. Bias will be assessed and recorded using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and that of the International Cochrane Collaboration. Dependent on the heterogeneity of the data, we aim to produce a cumulative incidence in addition to subgroup analyses as to investigate secondary outcomes.

Discussion

The aim of this systematic review is to provide a robust estimate of the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer. This will enable resource allocation and decision-making regarding the appropriateness of screening all women, or certain women, with endometrial cancer for Lynch syndrome. Such a policy could enable the earlier diagnosis of Lynch syndrome in women and, through the application of colorectal cancer surveillance, improve their survival outcomes.

Systematic review registration

This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (ref CRD42017081707).
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lynch HT, et al. Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications. Clin Genet. 2009;76:1–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lynch HT, et al. Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications. Clin Genet. 2009;76:1–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Lamberti C, et al. Microsatellite instability-a useful diagnostic tool to select patients at high risk for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: a study in different groups of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut. 1999;44:839–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lamberti C, et al. Microsatellite instability-a useful diagnostic tool to select patients at high risk for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: a study in different groups of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut. 1999;44:839–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Resnick KE, Hampel H, Fishel R, Cohn DE. Current and emerging trends in Lynch syndrome identification in women with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:128–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Resnick KE, Hampel H, Fishel R, Cohn DE. Current and emerging trends in Lynch syndrome identification in women with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114:128–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Moller P, et al. Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2017;66:464–72.CrossRefPubMed Moller P, et al. Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut. 2017;66:464–72.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Hampel H, et al. Screening for Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) among endometrial cancer patients. Cancer Res. 2006;66:7810–7.CrossRefPubMed Hampel H, et al. Screening for Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) among endometrial cancer patients. Cancer Res. 2006;66:7810–7.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Buchanan DD, et al. Tumor mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and DNA MLH1 methylation testing of patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed at age younger than 60 years optimizes triage for population-level germline mismatch repair gene mutation testing. JCO. 2013;32:JCO.2013.51.2129–100. Buchanan DD, et al. Tumor mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and DNA MLH1 methylation testing of patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed at age younger than 60 years optimizes triage for population-level germline mismatch repair gene mutation testing. JCO. 2013;32:JCO.2013.51.2129–100.
7.
go back to reference Goodfellow PJ, et al. Combined microsatellite instability, MLH1 methylation analysis, and immunohistochemistry for Lynch syndrome screening in endometrial cancers from GOG210: an NRG Oncology and Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:4301–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Goodfellow PJ, et al. Combined microsatellite instability, MLH1 methylation analysis, and immunohistochemistry for Lynch syndrome screening in endometrial cancers from GOG210: an NRG Oncology and Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:4301–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Joehlin-Price AS, et al. Mismatch repair protein expression in 1049 endometrial carcinomas, associations with body mass index, and other clinicopathologic variables. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:43–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Joehlin-Price AS, et al. Mismatch repair protein expression in 1049 endometrial carcinomas, associations with body mass index, and other clinicopathologic variables. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:43–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Mills AM, et al. Lynch syndrome screening should be considered for all patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:1501–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mills AM, et al. Lynch syndrome screening should be considered for all patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:1501–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
11.
go back to reference Mas-Moya J, et al. Clinicopathological comparison of colorectal and endometrial carcinomas in patients with Lynch-like syndrome versus patients with Lynch syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2015;46:1616–25.CrossRefPubMed Mas-Moya J, et al. Clinicopathological comparison of colorectal and endometrial carcinomas in patients with Lynch-like syndrome versus patients with Lynch syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2015;46:1616–25.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rabban JT, et al. Association of tumor morphology with mismatch-repair protein status in older endometrial cancer patients: implications for universal versus selective screening strategies for Lynch syndrome. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:793–800.CrossRefPubMed Rabban JT, et al. Association of tumor morphology with mismatch-repair protein status in older endometrial cancer patients: implications for universal versus selective screening strategies for Lynch syndrome. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:793–800.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Cairns SR, et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut. 2010;59:666–89.CrossRefPubMed Cairns SR, et al. Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002). Gut. 2010;59:666–89.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Colombo N, et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2011;22 Suppl 6:vi35–9.PubMed Colombo N, et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2011;22 Suppl 6:vi35–9.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Lindor NM, et al. Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1507–17.CrossRefPubMed Lindor NM, et al. Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1507–17.CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Hoboken: Wiley; 2011. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Hoboken: Wiley; 2011.
19.
go back to reference Shamseer L, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.CrossRefPubMed Shamseer L, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Kempers MJ, et al. Risk of colorectal and endometrial cancers in EPCAM deletion-positive Lynch syndrome: a cohort study. The Lancet Oncology. 2011;12:49–55.CrossRefPubMed Kempers MJ, et al. Risk of colorectal and endometrial cancers in EPCAM deletion-positive Lynch syndrome: a cohort study. The Lancet Oncology. 2011;12:49–55.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Peltomäki P. Epigenetic mechanisms in the pathogenesis of Lynch syndrome. Clin Genet. 2014;85:403–12.CrossRefPubMed Peltomäki P. Epigenetic mechanisms in the pathogenesis of Lynch syndrome. Clin Genet. 2014;85:403–12.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Boland CR, et al. A National Cancer Institute Workshop on Microsatellite Instability for cancer detection and familial predisposition: development of international criteria for the determination of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 1998;58:5248–57. Boland CR, et al. A National Cancer Institute Workshop on Microsatellite Instability for cancer detection and familial predisposition: development of international criteria for the determination of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 1998;58:5248–57.
23.
go back to reference Metcalf AM, Spurdle AB. Endometrial tumour BRAF mutations and MLH1 promoter methylation as predictors of germline mismatch repair gene mutation status: a literature review. Familial Cancer. 2013;13:1–12.CrossRef Metcalf AM, Spurdle AB. Endometrial tumour BRAF mutations and MLH1 promoter methylation as predictors of germline mismatch repair gene mutation status: a literature review. Familial Cancer. 2013;13:1–12.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25:603–5.CrossRefPubMed Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010;25:603–5.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer: a systematic review protocol
Authors
Neil A. J. Ryan
Dominic Blake
Marcus Cabrera-Dandy
Mark A. Glaire
D. Gareth Evans
Emma J. Crosbie
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0792-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Systematic Reviews 1/2018 Go to the issue