Fogel Brent L, Vickrey Barbara G, Walton-Wetzel Jenny, Lieber Eli, Browner Carole H
Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1553, USA.
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2013 Aug;17(8):588-94. doi: 10.1089/gtmb.2013.0005. Epub 2013 Jun 1.
To evaluate the utilization of laboratory testing in the diagnosis of cerebellar ataxia, including the completeness of initial standard testing for acquired causes, the early use of genetic testing, and associated clinical and nonclinical factors, among a cohort referred for subspecialty consultation.
Data were abstracted from records of 95 consecutive ataxia patients referred to one neurogenetics subspecialist from 2006-2010 and linked to publicly available data on characteristics of referral clinicians. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were used to analyze unique associations of clinical and nonclinical factors with laboratory investigation of acquired causes and with early genetic testing prior to referral.
At referral, 27 of 95 patients lacked evidence of any of 14 laboratory studies suggested for initial work-up of an acquired cause for ataxia (average number of tests=4.5). In contrast, 92% of patients had undergone brain magnetic resonance imaging prior to referral. Overall, 41.1% (n=39) had genetic testing prior to referral; there was no association between family history of ataxia and obtaining genetic testing prior to referral (p=0.39). The level of early genetic testing was 31.6%, primarily due to genetic testing despite an incomplete laboratory evaluation for acquired causes and no family history. A positive family history was consistently associated with less extensive laboratory testing (p=0.004), and referral by a neurologist was associated with higher levels of early genetic testing.
Among consecutive referrals to a single center, a substantial proportion of sporadic cases had genetic testing without evidence of a work-up for acquired causes. Better strategies to guide decision making and subspecialty referrals in rare neurologic disorders are needed, given the cost and consequences of genetic testing.
在一组因专科会诊而转诊的患者中,评估实验室检查在小脑共济失调诊断中的应用情况,包括对后天性病因进行初始标准检查的完整性、基因检测的早期使用情况以及相关的临床和非临床因素。
数据取自2006年至2010年连续转诊至一位神经遗传学专科医生处的95例共济失调患者的记录,并与转诊临床医生特征的公开可用数据相关联。采用多变量逻辑回归和线性回归模型分析临床和非临床因素与后天性病因实验室检查以及转诊前早期基因检测之间的独特关联。
转诊时,95例患者中有27例缺乏针对共济失调后天性病因初始检查所建议的14项实验室检查中的任何一项证据(平均检查次数 = 4.5)。相比之下,92%的患者在转诊前已进行脑磁共振成像检查。总体而言,41.1%(n = 39)的患者在转诊前进行了基因检测;共济失调家族史与转诊前进行基因检测之间无关联(p = 0.39)。早期基因检测水平为31.6%,主要是因为尽管对后天性病因的实验室评估不完整且无家族史,但仍进行了基因检测。阳性家族史始终与实验室检查范围较窄相关(p = 0.004),而由神经科医生转诊与早期基因检测水平较高相关。
在连续转诊至单一中心的患者中,相当一部分散发病例在未对后天性病因进行检查的情况下就进行了基因检测。鉴于基因检测的成本和后果,需要更好的策略来指导罕见神经系统疾病的决策制定和专科转诊。