Actionability Assertions

Gene Condition (MONDO ID) OMIM ID Final Assertion
NF2 N/A () 101000 Assertion Pending

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
Vestibular schwannoma / MRI/Screening 2 3B 2B 3 10BB
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

In the past, the estimated prevalence of neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2) was estimated at 1:210,000. However, a recent 2010 study estimated a higher prevalence of 1:60,000.
View Citations

(2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., (2009) URL: www.orpha.net., Baser ME, et al. (2003) PMID: 12544854, Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576

Clinical Features (Signs / symptoms)

NF2 is characterized by the development of nervous system tumors (schwannomas and meningiomas), ocular abnormalities, and skin tumors. Bilateral vestibular schwannomas occur in 95% of adult patients; vestibular schwannoma growth rates are extremely variable, both between patients and over time in the same patient. Schwannomas typically affect both vestibular nerves, leading to hearing loss and deafness, tinnitus, dizziness and imbalance.While the tumors caused by NF2 are not malignant, their anatomical location and multiplicity lead to great morbidity and early mortality.
View Citations

Baser ME, et al. (2003) PMID: 12544854, Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576, (2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., (2009) URL: www.orpha.net.

Natural History (Important subgroups & survival / recovery)

Average age of onset in individuals with NF2 is 18 to 24 years (range birth to 70 years). Nearly all affected individuals develop bilateral vestibular schwannomas by age 30. The average age of death is 36 years; actuarial survival from correct diagnosis is 15 years. NF2 has no racial or ethnic predilections.Childhood-onset NF2 typically presents with non-8th nerve tumors and non-vestibular symptoms, while adult-onset NF2 typically presents with vestibular symptoms. Age at diagnosis, presence of intracranial meningiomas, type of treatment center and type of NF2 mutation are informative predictors of the risk of mortality. Age at diagnosis is, by far, the strongest single predictor.
View Citations

Baser ME, et al. (2003) PMID: 12544854, Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576, (2011) 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
Prevalence of NF2 mutations was not identified.

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

>= 40 %
Penetrance is close to 100%. Virtually all individuals who have a pathogenic germline mutation develop the disease in an average lifetime.
Tier 4 View Citations

(2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

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

Unknown

Expressivity

Vestibular schwannoma growth rates are extremely variable, both between patients and over time in the same patient. Growth rates are highly variable even among multiple NF2 patients of similar ages in the same family.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov., Baser ME, et al. (2003) PMID: 12544854, Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576

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

At diagnosis, the following evaluations are recommended: head MRI, hearing evaluation including BAER, ophthalmologic evaluation, cutaneous evaluation, and a genetics consultation.
Tier 4 View Citations

(2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

NF2 patients should be managed in specialty centers. NF2 patients who are managed at specialty centers have a significantly lower risk of mortality than those who are treated at non-specialty centers (relative risk 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.98).
Tier 2 View Citations

Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576

Hearing preservation and augmentation are important in the management of individuals with NF2; all affected individual and their families should be referred to an audiologist.
Tier 2 View Citations

Gutmann DH, et al. (1997) PMID: 9207339

A cervical spine scan should be performed before cranial surgery to prevent complications from manipulation under anesthesia. Lumbosacral imaging should be performed before regional analgesia is given.
Tier 3 View Citations

(2011) URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

Surveillance

MRI screening every 2 years for patients less than 20 and every 3 years for older patients should be sufficient for at-risk patients without tumors. The initial MRI scan could be at 10-12 years of age, or earlier in severely affected families. In 10% of cases, individuals with NF2 become symptomatic before 10 years of age. Once tumors are present, MRI screening should be at least annual until the individual growth rate is established. Annual audiological tests, including auditory brainstem response, may be useful. A full annual neurological examination is a wise precaution, with a spinal MRI every 2-3 years unless no tumors are present on the initial scan.
Tier 2 View Citations

Evans DG, et al. (2005) PMID: 16147576, Gutmann DH, et al. (1997) PMID: 9207339

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 NF2 requires a variety of non-invasive screening tests.
Context: Adult

Chance to Escape Clinical Detection

Regular screening (MRI, neurological, audiology) is recommended beginning at diagnosis, or earlier for family members. These screenings are above and beyond general population recommendations.
Context: Adult

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
NF2 101000

References List

Baser ME, R Evans DG, Gutmann DH. (2003) Neurofibromatosis 2. Current opinion in neurology. 16(1):27-33.

Evans DG, Baser ME, O'Reilly B, Rowe J, Gleeson M, Saeed S, King A, Huson SM, Kerr R, Thomas N, Irving R, MacFarlane R, Ferner R, McLeod R, Moffat D, Ramsden R. (2005) Management of the patient and family with neurofibromatosis 2: a consensus conference statement. British journal of neurosurgery. 19(1):5-12.

Gutmann DH, Aylsworth A, Carey JC, Korf B, Marks J, Pyeritz RE, Rubenstein A, Viskochil D. (1997) The diagnostic evaluation and multidisciplinary management of neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2. JAMA. 278(1):51-7.

Neurofibromatosis 2. Gene Reviews (2011) URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1201/

Neurofibromatosis type 2. Orphanet (2009) URL: http://www.orpha.net/consor/cgi-bin/OC_Exp.php?Expert=637

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?