ABSTRACT
Li-Fraumeni syndrome is caused by heterozygous germline pathogenic variants in the TP53 gene. It involves a high risk of a variety of malignant tumors in childhood and adulthood, the main ones being premenopausal breast cancer, soft tissue sarcomas and osteosarcomas, central nervous system tumors, and adrenocortical carcinomas. The variability of the associated clinical manifestations, which do not always fit the classic criteria of Li-Fraumeni syndrome, has led the concept of SLF to extend to a more overarching cancer predisposition syndrome, termed hereditable TP53-related cancer syndrome (hTP53rc). However, prospective studies are needed to assess genotype-phenotype characteristics, as well as to evaluate and validate risk-adjusted recommendations. This guideline aims to establish the basis for interpreting pathogenic variants in the TP53 gene and provide recommendations for effective screening and prevention of associated cancers in carrier individuals.
Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Neoplasms , Adrenocortical Carcinoma , Bone Neoplasms , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome , Humans , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/genetics , Tumor Suppressor Protein p53/genetics , Adrenocortical Carcinoma/genetics , Germ-Line Mutation , Adrenal Cortex Neoplasms/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Germline mutations in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 genes (gBRCA1/2m) are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). The aim of this study was to estimate the efficiency of providing germline BRCA1/2 testing to high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (HGEOC) patients without family history of OC or BC and the subsequent testing and management of their relatives with gBRCA1/2m in Spain. METHODS/PATIENTS: Incident HGEOC patients without family history of OC or BC who were gBRCA1/2m carriers and their relatives were simulated in a 50-year time horizon. The study compared two scenarios: BRCA1/2 testing vs no testing, using the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service. Cancer risk among gBRCA1/2m carriers was estimated based on their age and whether they had undergone risk-reducing surgeries. Direct healthcare costs and utilities of patients who developed EOC and BC were also included. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) with 5 thousand simulations was developed considering ± 25% of the base-case value. RESULTS: The BRCA1/2-testing scenario amounted to 13,437,897.43 while the no-testing scenario amounted to 12,053,291.17. It was estimated that the screening test improved the quality of life among the patients' relatives by 43.8 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was 31,621.33/QALY in the base case. The PSA showed that 89.12% of the simulations were below the 50,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: Providing this screening test to HGEOC patients and their relatives is cost-effective and it allows one to identify a target population with high risk of cancer to provide effective prevention strategies.