Luca Maria, Carli Diana, Cardaropoli Simona, Milani Donatella, Cocchi Guido, Leoni Chiara, Macchiaiolo Marina, Bartuli Andrea, Tarani Luigi, Melis Daniela, Bontempo Piera, D'Elia Gemma, Prada Elisabetta, Vitale Raffaele, Grammegna Angelina, Tannorella Pierpaola, Sparago Angela, Pignata Laura, Riccio Andrea, Russo Silvia, Ferrero Giovanni Battista, Mussa Alessandro
Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Department of Public Health and Pediatric Sciences, University of Torino, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jan 26;15(3):773. doi: 10.3390/cancers15030773.
Different scoring systems for the clinical diagnosis of the Beckwith-Wiedemann spectrum (BWSp) have been developed over time, the most recent being the international consensus score. Here we try to validate and provide data on the performance metrics of these scoring systems of the 2018 international consensus and the previous ones, relating them to BWSp features, molecular tests, and the probability of cancer development in a cohort of 831 patients. The consensus scoring system had the best performance (sensitivity 0.85 and specificity 0.43). In our cohort, the diagnostic yield of tests on blood-extracted DNA was low in patients with a low consensus score (~20% with a score = 2), and the score did not correlate with cancer development. We observed hepatoblastoma (HB) in 4.3% of patients with UPD(11)pat and Wilms tumor in 1.9% of patients with isolated lateralized overgrowth (ILO). We validated the efficacy of the currently used consensus score for BWSp clinical diagnosis. Based on our observation, a first-tier analysis of tissue-extracted DNA in patients with <4 points may be considered. We discourage the use of the consensus score value as an indicator of the probability of cancer development. Moreover, we suggest considering cancer screening for negative patients with ILO (risk ~2%) and HB screening for patients with UPD(11)pat (risk ~4%).
随着时间的推移,已经开发出了不同的用于贝克威思-维德曼综合征(BWSp)临床诊断的评分系统,最新的是国际共识评分。在此,我们试图验证2018年国际共识评分系统及之前的评分系统的性能指标,并提供相关数据,将它们与831例患者队列中的BWSp特征、分子检测以及癌症发生概率相关联。共识评分系统表现最佳(敏感性0.85,特异性0.43)。在我们的队列中,共识评分低的患者(评分=2时约为20%)血液提取DNA检测的诊断率较低,且该评分与癌症发生无关。我们在4.3%的单亲二倍体(11)(UPD(11)pat)患者中观察到肝母细胞瘤(HB),在1.9%的孤立性单侧过度生长(ILO)患者中观察到肾母细胞瘤。我们验证了目前使用的共识评分对BWSp临床诊断的有效性。基于我们的观察,对于评分<4分的患者,可考虑对组织提取DNA进行一级分析。我们不鼓励将共识评分值作为癌症发生概率的指标。此外,我们建议对ILO阴性患者(风险约2%)考虑进行癌症筛查,对UPD(11)pat患者(风险约4%)考虑进行HB筛查。