用于识别林奇综合征的PREMM5和PREMMplus风险评估模型的比较

Comparison of PREMM5 and PREMMplus Risk Assessment Models to Identify Lynch Syndrome.

作者信息

Biller Leah H, Mittendorf Kate, Horiguchi Miki, Caruso Alyson, Chittenden Anu, Ukaegbu Chinedu, Uno Hajime, Syngal Sapna, Yurgelun Matthew B

机构信息

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

出版信息

JCO Precis Oncol. 2025 Jan;9:e2400691. doi: 10.1200/PO-24-00691. Epub 2025 Jan 7.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Clinical risk assessment models can identify patients with hereditary cancer susceptibility, but it is unknown how multigene cancer syndrome prediction models compare with syndrome-specific models in assessing risk for individual syndromes such as Lynch syndrome (LS). Our aim was to compare PREMMplus (a 19-gene cancer risk prediction model) with PREMM5 (a LS gene-specific model) for LS identification.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two cohorts of patients undergoing germline testing from a commercial laboratory (n = 12,020) and genetics clinic (n = 6,232) with personal and/or family histories of LS-associated cancer. Individual PREMMplus and PREMM5 scores were calculated for all patients. Using a score cutoff of 2.5%, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value (NPV) for identifying LS with each model. Overall ability to discriminate LS carriers from noncarriers was measured using receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-AUC.

RESULTS

PREMMplus had higher sensitivity than PREMM5 in the laboratory- (63.7% [95% CI, 57.0 to 70.0] 89.2% [95% CI, 84.4 to 93.0]) and clinic-based cohorts (60.8% [95% CI, 52.7 to 68.4] 90.5% [95% CI, 84.8 to 94.6]). NPV was ≥98.8% for both models in both cohorts. PREMM5 had superior discriminatory capacity to PREMMplus in the laboratory- (ROC-AUC, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.77 to 0.84] 0.71 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.75]) and clinic-based cohorts (ROC-AUC, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.75 to 0.84] 0.68 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.73]).

CONCLUSION

Both PREMM5 and PREMMplus demonstrated high NPVs (>98%) in LS discrimination across all patient cohorts, and both models may be used to identify individuals at risk of LS. The choice of which model to use can be based on the goals of risk assessment and patient population.

摘要

目的

临床风险评估模型可识别遗传性癌症易感性患者,但多基因癌症综合征预测模型与综合征特异性模型在评估诸如林奇综合征(LS)等个体综合征风险方面的比较尚不清楚。我们的目的是比较PREMMplus(一种19基因癌症风险预测模型)与PREMM5(一种LS基因特异性模型)用于识别LS的情况。

方法

我们分析了来自商业实验室(n = 12,020)和遗传学诊所(n = 6,232)的两个队列中接受种系检测的患者的数据,这些患者有LS相关癌症的个人和/或家族病史。为所有患者计算个体PREMMplus和PREMM5评分。使用2.5%的评分临界值,我们计算了每个模型识别LS的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值(NPV)。使用受试者操作特征(ROC)-AUC测量区分LS携带者与非携带者的总体能力。

结果

在实验室队列(63.7% [95% CI,57.0至70.0]对89.2% [95% CI,84.4至93.0])和基于诊所的队列(60.8% [95% CI,52.7至68.4]对90.5% [95% CI,84.8至94.6])中,PREMMplus的敏感性高于PREMM5。在两个队列中,两种模型的NPV均≥98.8%。在实验室队列(ROC-AUC,0.81 [95% CI,0.77至0.84]对0.71 [95% CI,0.67至0.75])和基于诊所的队列(ROC-AUC,0.79 [95% CI,0.75至0.84]对0.68 [95% CI,0.64至0.73])中,PREMM5区分能力优于PREMMplus。

结论

PREMM5和PREMMplus在所有患者队列的LS鉴别中均显示出高NPV(>98%),两种模型均可用于识别有LS风险的个体。使用哪种模型的选择可基于风险评估目标和患者群体。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索