Actionability Assertions

Gene Condition (MONDO ID) OMIM ID Final Assertion
No assertions found.

Actionability Assertion Rationale

  • This topic was initially scored prior to development of the process for making actionability assertions. The Actionability Working Group decided to defer making an assertion until after the topic could be reviewed through the update process.

Actionability Scores

Outcome / Intervention Pair Severity Likelihood Effectiveness Nature of Intervention Total Score
Breast cancer / Regular screening 2 3C 2B 3 10CB
Thyroid cancer / Thyroid ultrasounds 2 2C 2B 3 9CB
View scoring key
Domain of Actionability Scoring Metric State of the Knowledgebase
Severity: What is the nature of the threat to health to an individual? 3 = Sudden death as a reasonably possible outcome
2 = Reasonable possibility of death or major morbidity
1 = Modest morbidity
0 = Minimal or no morbidity
N/A
Likelihood: What is the chance that the outcome will occur? 3 = >40% chance
2 = 5%-39% chance
1 = 1%-4% chance
0 = <1% chance
A = Substantial evidence or evidence from a high tier (tier 1)
B = Moderate evidence or evidence from a moderate tier (tier 2)
C = Minimal evidence or evidence from a lower tier (tier 3 or 4)
D = Poor evidence or evidence not provided in the report
N = Evidence based on expert contributions (tier 5)
Effectiveness: What is the effectiveness of a specific intervention in preventing or diminishing the risk of harm? 3 = Highly effective
2 = Moderately effective
1 = Minimally effective
0 = Controversial or unknown effectiveness
IN = Ineffective/No interventiona
A = Substantial evidence or evidence from a high tier (tier 1)
B = Moderate evidence or evidence from a moderate tier (tier 2)
C = Minimal evidence or evidence from a lower tier (tier 3 or 4)
D = Poor evidence or evidence not provided in the report
N = Evidence based on expert contributions (tier 5)
Nature of intervention: How risky, medically burdensome, or intensive is the intervention? 3 = Low risk, or medically acceptable and low intensity
2 = Moderate risk, moderately acceptable or intensive
1 = Greater risk, less acceptable and substantial intensity
0 = High risk, poorly acceptable or intensive
N/A
a Do not score the remaining categories

Prevalence of the Genetic Condition

The true prevalence of Cowden syndrome (CS) is unknown.
View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org., Hall JE, et al. (2013) PMID: 22431287, (2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., Eng C, et al. (2000) PMID: 11073535, Online Medelian Inheritance in Man. (2016) OMIM: 158350, (2014) URL: www.orpha.net.

Clinical Features (Signs / symptoms)

CS is part of the PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome (PHTS) spectrum. CS is a cancer syndrome associated with a high risk of hamartomas and/or cancerous lesions in various organs and tissues, including the skin, mucous membranes, breast, thyroid, endometrium, and brain. Macrocephaly is a common manifestation. Hamartomatous polyps of the colon and other intestines also occur. Renal cell carcinoma and malignant melanoma may be minor component neoplasias of CS.
View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org., (2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., Online Medelian Inheritance in Man. (2016) OMIM: 158350, Eng C, et al. (2000) PMID: 11073535, (2014) URL: www.orpha.net.

Natural History (Important subgroups & survival / recovery)

More than 90% of individuals with CS have some clinical manifestation of the disorder by the late 20s. By the third decade, 99% of affected individuals develop the mucocutaneous stigmata, as well as acral and plantar keratoses. The average age of breast cancer diagnosis is between 38 and 46 years. The median age of epithelial thyroid cancer onset is 37 years. Elevated risk for endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, and renal cell carcinoma starts in the late 30s and early 40s.
View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org., (2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Mode of Inheritance

Autosomal Dominant

Prevalence of Genetic Variants

Unknown
Information on the prevalence of PTEN mutations was not available.

Penetrance (Includes any high-risk racial or ethnic subgroups)

>= 40 %
More than 90% of individuals with CS have some clinical manifestation of the disorder by the late 20s. By the third decade, 99% of affected individuals develop the mucocutaneous stigmata.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., (2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

>= 40 %
Among individuals meeting the diagnostic criteria for CS, the cumulative lifetime risk of any cancer is 89%.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

>= 40 %
The lifetime risk of breast cancer for females with a PTEN pathogenic variant is 77-85%, with 50% penetrance by age 50.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., (2014) URL: www.orpha.net.

5-39 %
Lifetime risk of epithelial thyroid cancer ranges from 21-38%.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., (2019) URL: www.nccn.org., (2014) URL: www.orpha.net.

Relative Risk (Includes any high-risk racial or ethnic subgroups)

Unknown

Expressivity

The high variability in disease expression is highlighted by the fact that clinical diagnosis in an individual is based on three of eight possible major diagnostic criteria, or two major criteria and three of eleven possible minor criteria.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Patient Management

Information on the effectiveness of the patient management recommendations below was not available.
At diagnosis: individuals should undergo a physical examination, paying particular attention to skin, mucous membranes, thyroid, and breasts; urinalysis; and medical genetics consultation. Individuals diagnosed after ages 35 and 40 should undergo colonoscopy and renal imaging, respectively. Women diagnosed after age 30 should undergo breast screening and transvaginal ultrasound.
Tier 4 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Dermatologic management may be indicated for some patients.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Risk-reduction mastectomy and hysterectomy should be discussed on a case-by-case basis.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

CS patients should be educated about the signs and symptoms of cancer.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Surveillance

CS patients should undergo annual comprehensive examinations.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Women should be breast aware starting at age 18, including periodic, consistent breast self-exam. Clinical breast exam, every 6-12 months, should begin at age 25, or 5-10 years before the earliest known breast cancer in the family.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Women should undergo annual mammography and breast MRI screening starting at age 30-35 or individualized based on earliest age of onset in the family.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org., (2012) URL: www.guideline.gov.

Women should consider annual random endometrial biopsies and/or ultrasound beginning at age 30-35.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Individuals with CS should receive annual thyroid ultrasounds starting at age 18 or 5-10 years before the earliest known thyroid cancer in the family, whichever is earlier.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Individuals with CS should undergo colonoscopy, starting at age 35, then every 5 years, or more frequently if patient is symptomatic or polyps are found.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Consider renal ultrasound starting at age 40, then every 1-2 years.
Tier 2 View Citations

(2019) URL: www.nccn.org.

Circumstances to Avoid

Because of the propensity for rapid tissue regrowth, it is recommended that cutaneous lesions be excised only if malignancy is suspected or symptoms are significant.
Tier 4 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.

Nature of Intervention

Management of CS includes regular invasive and non-invasive screening tests and the possible recommendation of prophylactic organ removal for affected women.
Context: Adult

Chance to Escape Clinical Detection

Given the age of development of cancers in CS patients, general population screening would not allow for prophylactic measures to be taken. The increased cancer surveillance in this population will allow detection of tumors at the earliest, most treatable stages.
Context: Adult
Tier 4 View Citations

(2014) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Description of sources of evidence:

Tier 1: Evidence from a systematic review or a meta-analysis or clinical practice guideline clearly based on a systematic review.
Tier 2: Evidence from clinical practice guidelines or broad-based expert consensus with non-systematic evidence review.
Tier 3: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with primary literature cited.
Tier 4: Evidence from another source with non-systematic review of evidence with no citations to primary data sources.
Tier 5: Evidence from a non-systematically identified source.
Gene Condition Associations
OMIM Identifier Primary MONDO Identifier Additional MONDO Identifiers

References List

COWDEN SYNDROME 1; CWS1. Online Medelian Inheritance in Man, OMIM®. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. MIM: 158350, (2016) World Wide Web URL: http://omim.org/

Eng C. (2000) Will the real Cowden syndrome please stand up: revised diagnostic criteria. Journal of medical genetics. 37(11):828-30.

Hall JE, Abdollahian DJ, Sinard RJ. (2013) Thyroid disease associated with Cowden syndrome: A meta-analysis. Head & neck. 35(8):1189-94.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Breast Cancer Screening, Pre-Operative Assessment, and Follow-up. NCG (2012) URL: https://www.guideline.gov/content.aspx?id=34595

NCCN Guidelines® Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment Breast and Ovarian. (2019) URL: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/genetics_screening.pdf

PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS). Gene Reviews (2014) URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1488/

PTEN hemartoma tumor syndrome. Orphanet (2014) URL: http://www.orpha.net/consor/cgi-bin/OC_Exp.php?Expert=306498

Early Rule-Out Summary

This topic passed the early rule out stage

Findings of Early Rule-Out Assessment

  1. Is there a qualifying resource, such as a practice guideline or systematic review, for the genetic condition?
  2. Does the practice guideline or systematic review indicate that the result is actionable in one or more of the following ways?
  3. a. Patient Management

    b. Surveillance or Screening

    c. Circumstances to Avoid

  4. Is it actionable in an undiagnosed adult with the condition?
  5. Is this condition an important health problem?
  6. Is there at least on known pathogenic variant with at least moderate penetrance (≥40%) or moderate relative risk (≥2) in any population?