Author(s): Evaluation of Genomic Appli
Abstract Share this page
Abstract SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group found adequate evidence to recommend against routine testing for Factor V Leiden (FVL) and/or prothrombin 20210G>A (PT) in the following circumstances: (1) adults with idiopathic venous thromboembolism (VTE). In such cases, longer term secondary prophylaxis to avoid recurrence offers similar benefits to patients with and without one or more of these mutations. (2) Asymptomatic adult family members of patients with VTE and an FVL or PT mutation, for the purpose of considering primary prophylactic anticoagulation. Potential benefits are unlikely to exceed potential harms. The overall certainty of these findings was deemed "moderate." The evidence was insufficient to determine whether FVL/PT testing might have clinical utility in some circumstances, such as for identifying FVL homozygosity among asymptomatic family members of adults with idiopathic VTE or counseling patients about the risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy. Based on the available evidence, the certainty of net health benefit was deemed "low." The recommendations do not extend to patients with other risk factors for thrombosis, such as contraceptive use, as the evidence review that serves as the basis for the recommendations focused primarily on idiopathic VTE. RATIONALE: In developing these recommendations the EGAPP Working Group considered evidence in the following three areas. ANALYTIC VALIDITY: There is adequate evidence that testing accurately and reliably detects the R506Q (FVL) and 20210G>A (PT) variants in the Factor V and PT genes, respectively (a more complete definition of analytic validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility is contained under the "Clinical Considerations" section). CLINICAL VALIDITY: The presence of a heterozygous FVL variant seems to be a weak risk factor for recurrence of VTE (odds ratio [OR]: 1.56). Rare homozygous FVL mutations present somewhat greater risks of VTE recurrence (OR: 2.65). The evidence for this increased risk is convincing, but the magnitude of excess risk is not as great as previously thought. The evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions about excess VTE recurrence risk resulting from compound heterozygosity (FVL and PT), but it is likely to be at least as high as with FVL alone. The OR for compound heterozygosity is 6.69. The evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions about VTE recurrence risks associated with PT mutations alone. For family members of index VTE cases, there is convincing evidence that both heterozygosity and homozygosity for FVL are associated with higher risks for VTE occurrence (ORs 3.49 and 17.84, respectively) than for family members without FVL variants. CLINICAL UTILITY: There is convincing evidence that longer term secondary prophylaxis after an initial idiopathic VTE event yields comparable benefits to those with and without a FVL or PT mutation. For asymptomatic family members of index cases, no prophylaxis trials have been reported. Hence, there is no direct evidence of particular benefit to family members. Potential net harm is possible if primary prophylaxis is administered to asymptomatic family members with one or more mutations, because the absolute risk of an initial VTE event is low, and the risk of anticoagulant-induced hemorrhage is relatively high.
This article was published in Genet Med
and referenced in Family Medicine & Medical Science Research