An economic viewpoint on alternative strategies for identifying persons with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

PubWeight™: 1.18‹?› | Rank: Top 10%

🔗 View Article (PMC 2692576)

Published in Genet Med on September 22, 2003

Authors

Scott D Ramsey1, Wylie Burke, Lauren Clarke

Author Affiliations

1: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Articles citing this

EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome. Genet Med (2009) 3.57

Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med (2011) 3.52

Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of primary genetic screening for Lynch syndrome in the general population. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) (2010) 2.86

Cost-effectiveness and diagnostic effectiveness analyses of multiple algorithms for the diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. Dig Dis Sci (2014) 2.77

Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: molecular genetics, genetic counseling, diagnosis and management. Fam Cancer (2007) 1.82

Challenges of translating genetic tests into clinical and public health practice. Nat Rev Genet (2009) 1.62

Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework: how to assess relevance and possibilities. Background Document to the ESHG recommendations on genetic testing and common disorders. Eur J Hum Genet (2011) 1.57

Economic evaluation of genetic screening for Lynch syndrome in Germany. Genet Med (2015) 1.10

Challenges to the translation of genomic information into clinical practice and health policy: Utilization, preferences and economic value. Curr Opin Mol Ther (2008) 1.08

Family history assessment to detect increased risk for colorectal cancer: conceptual considerations and a preliminary economic analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev (2005) 0.97

Predictive genetic testing of first degree relatives of mutation carriers is a cost-effective strategy in preventing hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer in Singapore. Fam Cancer (2012) 0.89

Comparative effectiveness of next generation genomic sequencing for disease diagnosis: design of a randomized controlled trial in patients with colorectal cancer/polyposis syndromes. Contemp Clin Trials (2014) 0.86

MLH1 and MSH2 mutations in Colombian families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome)--description of four novel mutations. Fam Cancer (2005) 0.85

When is Genomic Testing Cost-Effective? Testing for Lynch Syndrome in Patients with Newly-Diagnosed Colorectal Cancer and Their Relatives. Healthcare (Basel) (2015) 0.81

Clinical guidelines versus universal molecular testing: are we ready to choose an optimal strategy for Lynch syndrome identification? Am J Gastroenterol (2008) 0.80

A model-based assessment of the cost-utility of strategies to identify Lynch syndrome in early-onset colorectal cancer patients. BMC Cancer (2015) 0.79

Cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer patients up to 70 years of age. Genet Med (2016) 0.76

Universal Versus Targeted Screening for Lynch Syndrome: Comparing Ascertainment and Costs Based on Clinical Experience. Dig Dis Sci (2016) 0.75

Articles cited by this

Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380. N Engl J Med (2000) 13.21

The International Collaborative Group on Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal Cancer (ICG-HNPCC). Dis Colon Rectum (1991) 9.82

Potential for cancer related health services research using a linked Medicare-tumor registry database. Med Care (1993) 9.72

Tumor microsatellite instability and clinical outcome in young patients with colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med (2000) 8.68

Incidence of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer and the feasibility of molecular screening for the disease. N Engl J Med (1998) 8.47

Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology (2000) 8.41

Immunohistochemistry versus microsatellite instability testing in phenotyping colorectal tumors. J Clin Oncol (2002) 5.91

A National Cancer Institute Workshop on Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer Syndrome: meeting highlights and Bethesda guidelines. J Natl Cancer Inst (1997) 5.68

Genomic instability in colorectal cancer: relationship to clinicopathological variables and family history. Cancer Res (1993) 4.93

ASHG statement. Professional disclosure of familial genetic information. The American Society of Human Genetics Social Issues Subcommittee on Familial Disclosure. Am J Hum Genet (1998) 4.33

Population-based molecular detection of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol (2000) 3.98

Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. I. Hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. Cancer Genetics Studies Consortium. JAMA (1997) 2.73

Towards safer colonoscopy: a report on the complications of 5000 diagnostic or therapeutic colonoscopies. Gut (1983) 2.66

The accuracy of patient reports of a family history of cancer. J Chronic Dis (1985) 2.56

Comparison of self-reported and database-linked family history of cancer data in a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol (1997) 2.14

Interpretation of genetic test results for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: implications for clinical predisposition testing. JAMA (1999) 2.14

Microsatellite instability and the role of hMSH2 in sporadic colorectalcancer. Oncogene (1996) 1.89

How accurate is self-reported family history of colorectal cancer? Am J Epidemiol (1995) 1.86

Standardized approach for microsatellite instability detection in colorectal carcinomas. J Natl Cancer Inst (2000) 1.80

Health economic evaluations: the special case of end-stage renal disease treatment. Med Decis Making (2002) 1.78

A prospective study of mortality associated with anaesthesia and surgery: risk indicators of mortality in hospital. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand (1990) 1.75

Genetics education for primary-care providers. Nat Rev Genet (2002) 1.73

Genetic testing in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. JAMA (1999) 1.61

Gene defect identified in common hereditary colon cancer. Science (1993) 1.54

Cost-effectiveness of microsatellite instability screening as a method for detecting hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med (2001) 1.50

Complications in endoscopy of the lower gastrointestinal tract. Therapy and prognosis. Surg Endosc (1994) 1.48

2000 update of American Society of Clinical Oncology colorectal cancer surveillance guidelines. J Clin Oncol (2000) 1.43

A novel approach to estimate the proportion of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer of total colorectal cancer burden. Cancer Detect Prev (1994) 1.36

Dominant genes for colorectal cancer are not rare. Ann Hum Genet (1992) 1.30

Estimating the costs attributable to a disease with application to ovarian cancer. J Clin Epidemiol (1996) 1.24

American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement: hereditary colorectal cancer and genetic testing. Gastroenterology (2001) 1.24

Comparison of selection strategies for genetic testing of patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma: effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Cancer (2002) 1.23

Survival analysis in families affected by hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer (1997) 1.23

Privacy and confidentiality of genetic information: what rules for the new science? Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet (2001) 1.14

Selective management of colonoscopic perforations. J Am Coll Surg (1994) 1.12

Family history characteristics, tumor microsatellite instability and germline MSH2 and MLH1 mutations in hereditary colorectal cancer. Hum Genet (1999) 1.10

Curative resection for left colonic carcinoma: hemicolectomy vs. segmental colectomy. A prospective, controlled, multicenter trial. French Association for Surgical Research. Dis Colon Rectum (1994) 1.05

Interest in genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: cognitive and emotional correlates. Prev Med (1993) 1.05

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: clinical features and survival. Results from the Danish HNPCC register. Scand J Gastroenterol (1997) 1.04

Interest in genetic testing among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients. Am J Prev Med (2000) 1.03

Surveillance in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: an international cooperative study of 165 families. The International Collaborative Group on HNPCC. Dis Colon Rectum (1993) 0.97

A personal experience with 100 consecutive total colectomies and straight ileoanal endorectal pull-throughs for benign disease of the colon and rectum in children and adults. Ann Surg (1990) 0.97

The impact of including future medical care costs when estimating the costs attributable to a disease: a colorectal cancer case study. Health Econ (2001) 0.90

HNPCC: an uncommon but important diagnosis. Gastroenterology (2001) 0.87

Lifetime cancer-attributable cost of care for long term survivors of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol (2002) 0.86

Prevalence of hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma (HNPCC). Ann Med (1994) 0.85

Identification of concurrent germ-line mutations in hMSH2 and/or hMLH1 in Japanese hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer kindreds. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev (1997) 0.85

The endorectal ileal pullthrough procedure in patients with ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis with carcinoma. Surg Gynecol Obstet (1989) 0.84

The use of gene tests to detect hereditary predisposition to cancer: economic considerations. J Natl Cancer Inst (1995) 0.84

Owning genetic information and gene enhancement techniques: why privacy and property rights may undermine social control of the human genome. Bioethics (2000) 0.79

Hereditary colorectal cancer. Semin Oncol (1999) 0.78

Billing and Record-Keeping for Familial Cancer Risk Counseling: A National Survey. J Genet Couns (1998) 0.77

Colon cancer screening. Science (1994) 0.77

Pate v. Threlkel. Wests South Report (1995) 0.77

Genetic testing falls short of public embrace. N Y Times Web (1998) 0.76

Safer v. Estate of Pack. Atl Report (1996) 0.76

Descriptive epidemiology of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Tumori (1996) 0.76

Amsterdam criteria II and endometrial cancer index cases for an accurate selection of HNPCC families. Tumori (2002) 0.76

Articles by these authors

International network of cancer genome projects. Nature (2010) 20.35

Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med (2005) 16.70

American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin (2007) 12.19

Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group. Circ Cardiovasc Genet (2010) 6.74

An unwelcome side effect of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: raiding the medical commons. JAMA (2008) 5.25

Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA (2006) 4.87

Offering individual genetic research results: context matters. Sci Transl Med (2010) 4.51

American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin (2003) 4.43

Actionable, pathogenic incidental findings in 1,000 participants' exomes. Am J Hum Genet (2013) 4.06

Reconsidering the family history in primary care. J Gen Intern Med (2004) 3.50

Genomic research and wide data sharing: views of prospective participants. Genet Med (2010) 3.45

National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference: role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med (2012) 3.44

Return of individual research results from genome-wide association studies: experience of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network. Genet Med (2012) 3.29

Glad you asked: participants' opinions of re-consent for dbGap data submission. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics (2010) 3.29

Potential for genetics to promote public health: genetics research on smoking suggests caution about expectations. JAMA (2006) 3.20

ASHG Statement* on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the United States. Obstet Gynecol (2007) 3.19

Newborn screening technology: proceed with caution. Pediatrics (2006) 2.54

Science and regulation. Regulating direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Science (2010) 2.40

A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice. Genet Med (2010) 2.40

The genomic applications in practice and prevention network. Genet Med (2009) 2.39

Impact of reduced tobacco smoking on lung cancer mortality in the United States during 1975-2000. J Natl Cancer Inst (2012) 2.30

Pharmacogenetic testing: not as simple as it seems. Genet Med (2008) 2.18

Genomic profiling to promote a healthy lifestyle: not ready for prime time. Nat Genet (2003) 2.11

The FDA and genomic tests--getting regulation right. N Engl J Med (2015) 2.09

Processes and preliminary outputs for identification of actionable genes as incidental findings in genomic sequence data in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium. Genet Med (2013) 2.08

Next-generation sequencing in the clinic: are we ready? Nat Rev Genet (2012) 1.95

The OHRP and SUPPORT. N Engl J Med (2013) 1.78

Design, implementation, and first-year outcomes of a value-based drug formulary. J Manag Care Spec Pharm (2015) 1.67

Researcher perspectives on disclosure of incidental findings in genetic research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics (2010) 1.55

Differential use of available genetic tests among primary care physicians in the United States: results of a national survey. Genet Med (2008) 1.51

Clinical decisions. Screening an asymptomatic person for genetic risk. N Engl J Med (2014) 1.51

Informed Consent in Genome-Scale Research: What Do Prospective Participants Think? AJOB Prim Res (2012) 1.50

Confronting real time ethical, legal, and social issues in the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Consortium. Genet Med (2010) 1.47

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer: association with lobular breast cancer. Fam Cancer (2008) 1.45

Genetic counseling and testing for Alzheimer disease: joint practice guidelines of the American College of Medical Genetics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors. Genet Med (2011) 1.44

Current priorities for public health practice in addressing the role of human genomics in improving population health. Am J Prev Med (2011) 1.36

Taking family history seriously. Ann Intern Med (2005) 1.36

Online tool to guide decisions for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol (2012) 1.35

Diverse perceptions of the informed consent process: implications for the recruitment and participation of diverse communities in the National Children's Study. Am J Community Psychol (2012) 1.28

Trends in death associated with pediatric dental sedation and general anesthesia. Paediatr Anaesth (2013) 1.28

Gene expression profiling and breast cancer care: what are the potential benefits and policy implications? Genet Med (2005) 1.27

Ethical issues in identifying and recruiting participants for familial genetic research. Am J Med Genet A (2004) 1.20

Offering aggregate results to participants in genomic research: opportunities and challenges. Genet Med (2012) 1.19

Return of incidental findings in genomic medicine: measuring what patients value--development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generation testing (IMPRINT). Genet Med (2013) 1.16

The cost-effectiveness of combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide and luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonist in men with metastatic prostate cancer. J Urol (2005) 1.16

Return of results: ethical and legal distinctions between research and clinical care. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet (2014) 1.16

Colony-stimulating factor prescribing patterns in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer. Am J Manag Care (2010) 1.15

NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer. NIH Consens State Sci Statements (2013) 1.14

Managing incidental genomic findings: legal obligations of clinicians. Genet Med (2013) 1.11

Pharmacogenomic testing to prevent aminoglycoside-induced hearing loss in cystic fibrosis patients: potential impact on clinical, patient, and economic outcomes. Genet Med (2007) 1.11

Educational needs in genetic medicine: primary care perspectives. Community Genet (2008) 1.09

Waiving informed consent in newborn screening research: balancing social value and respect. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet (2008) 1.08

Breast cancer risk counseling improves women's functioning. Patient Educ Couns (2004) 1.06

Will genomics widen or help heal the schism between medicine and public health? Am J Prev Med (2007) 1.06

Anticipating dissemination of cancer genomics in public health: a theoretical approach to psychosocial and behavioral challenges. Ann Behav Med (2007) 1.05

Genetics researchers' and IRB professionals' attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis. Genet Med (2012) 1.05

Does genomic risk information motivate people to change their behavior? Genome Med (2009) 1.03

Genetic Simulation Resources: a website for the registration and discovery of genetic data simulators. Bioinformatics (2013) 1.01

Cost effectiveness of entecavir versus lamivudine with adefovir salvage in HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. Pharmacoeconomics (2007) 1.00

Stakeholder perspectives on a risk-benefit framework for genetic testing. Public Health Genomics (2010) 0.98

Predictors of recruited melanoma families into a behavioral intervention project. Contemp Clin Trials (2011) 0.98

Primary-care physicians' access to genetic specialists: an impediment to the routine use of genomic medicine? Genet Med (2013) 0.97

Genetic exceptionalism. Too much of a good thing? Genet Med (2008) 0.97

From leaky pipeline to irrigation system: minority education through the lens of community-based participatory research. Prog Community Health Partnersh (2012) 0.97

Family history assessment to detect increased risk for colorectal cancer: conceptual considerations and a preliminary economic analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev (2005) 0.97

Genetic information: Special or not? Responses from focus groups with members of a health maintenance organization. Am J Med Genet A (2007) 0.96

Implementation outcomes of a multiinstitutional web-based ethical, legal, and social implications genetics curriculum for primary care residents in three specialties. Genet Med (2011) 0.96

Is combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide cost-effective compared with combined androgen blockade with flutamide? Urology (2005) 0.95

Effects of individual and family functioning on interest in genetic testing. Community Genet (2004) 0.94

Effects of web-based intervention on risk reduction behaviors in melanoma survivors. J Cancer Surviv (2014) 0.94

The rules remain the same for genomic medicine: the case against "reverse genetic exceptionalism". Genet Med (2010) 0.93

Beneficence, clinical urgency, and the return of individual research results to relatives. Am J Bioeth (2012) 0.93

Diversity of model approaches for breast cancer screening: a review of model assumptions by the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Network (CISNET) Breast Cancer Groups. Stat Methods Med Res (2004) 0.92

Cytochrome p450 enzyme polymorphism frequency in indigenous and native american populations: a systematic review. Community Genet (2008) 0.91

Risk, reward, and the double-edged sword: perspectives on pharmacogenetic research and clinical testing among Alaska Native people. Am J Public Health (2013) 0.91

Health system implications of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Public Health Genomics (2010) 0.90

Population description and its role in the interpretation of genetic association. Hum Genet (2010) 0.90

Evaluation of erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: impact on the budget of a U.S. health insurance plan. J Manag Care Pharm (2006) 0.89

Will knowledge of gene-based colorectal cancer disease risk influence quality of life and screening behavior? Findings from a population-based study. Public Health Genomics (2009) 0.88

Maternal perspectives on the return of genetic results: context matters. Am J Med Genet A (2012) 0.88

Breast cancer risk communication: assessment of primary care physicians by standardized patients. Genet Med (2009) 0.88

Incorporating principles and practical wisdom in research ethics education: a preliminary study. Acad Med (2007) 0.87

Using pharmacogenetics to improve drug safety and efficacy. JAMA (2004) 0.85

Building partnerships in community-based participatory research: budgetary and other cost considerations. Health Promot Pract (2013) 0.85

Long-term outcomes of the "Genetics in Primary Care" faculty development initiative. Fam Med (2009) 0.84

Achieving utility with family history: colorectal cancer risk. Am J Prev Med (2003) 0.83

Pharmacogenetic research in partnership with American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Pharmacogenomics (2014) 0.83

Deliberate deceit of family members: a challenge to providers of clinical genetics services. J Clin Oncol (2006) 0.83

Familial aggregation of early-onset myocardial infarction. Community Genet (2002) 0.81

Effects of counseling Ashkenazi Jewish women about breast cancer risk. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol (2006) 0.81

Motivating factors for physician ordering of factor V Leiden genetic tests. Arch Intern Med (2009) 0.81

Genetic risk in context: calculating the penetrance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Natl Cancer Inst (2002) 0.81

Adding pharmacogenetics information to drug labels: lessons learned. Pharmacogenet Genomics (2006) 0.80

Health care use and primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors. Value Health (2011) 0.80

Native Hawaiian views on biobanking. J Cancer Educ (2014) 0.80

Personalized medicine and tobacco-related health disparities: is there a role for genetics? Ann Fam Med (2011) 0.80

Clinical and public health implications of emerging genetic technologies. Semin Nephrol (2010) 0.80

Use of Factor V Leiden genetic testing in practice and impact on management. Genet Med (2009) 0.79