It is often challenging for the clinician interested in cystic fibrosis (CF) to interpret molecular genetic results, and to integrate them in the diagnostic process. The limitations of genotyping technology, the choice of mutations to be tested, and the clinical context in which the test is administered can all influence how genetic information is interpreted. This paper describes the conclusions of a consensus conference to address the use and interpretation of CF mutation analysis in clinical settings. Although the diagnosis of CF is usually straightforward, care needs to be exercised in the use and interpretation of genetic tests: genotype information is not the final arbiter of a clinical diagnosis of CF or CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein related disorders. The diagnosis of these conditions is primarily based on the clinical presentation, and is supported by evaluation of CFTR function (sweat testing, nasal potential difference) and genetic analysis. None of these features are sufficient on their own to make a diagnosis of CF or CFTR-related disorders. Broad genotype/phenotype associations are useful in epidemiological studies, but CFTR genotype does not accurately predict individual outcome. The use of CFTR genotype for prediction of prognosis in people with CF at the time of their diagnosis is not recommended. The importance of communication between clinicians and medical genetic laboratories is emphasized. The results of testing and their implications should be reported in a manner understandable to the clinicians caring for CF patients.
Data up to 1995 on the survival of 3-yr cohorts of patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) born in the UK in the period 1968–1992 have previously been published. The present study reports survival data up to the end of 2003 together with a 2003 population estimate.All subjects with CF born in the UK in the period 1968–1992 were identified up to 1997 by active enquiry through recognised CF clinics and other hospital consultants. Information from the death certification authorities up to the end of 2003 was added. Death certificates that could not be matched with UK Cystic Fibrosis Survey records were investigated and the data reconciled.The observed survival up to 2003 of CF patients born in 1978 was 55% for males and 49% for females. For 1988 and 1992 the data were 91 and 88%, and 97 and 96%, respectively. The estimated 2003 mid-year CF population was 8,284.The continuing improvement in survival of cystic fibrosis patients in successive cohorts means that the previous prediction of median survival of >50 yrs of age for individuals born in 2000 continues to look realistic, even in the absence of proven effective therapy aimed at correcting the basic cystic fibrosis defect.
Several diseases have been clinically or genetically related to cystic fibrosis (CF), but a consensus definition is lacking. Here, we present a proposal for consensus guidelines on cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR)-related disorders (CFTR-RDs), reached after expert discussion and two dedicated workshops. A CFTR-RD may be defined as "a clinical entity associated with CFTR dysfunction that does not fulfil diagnostic criteria for CF". The utility of sweat testing, mutation analysis, nasal potential difference, and/or intestinal current measurement for the differential diagnosis of CF and CFTR-RD is discussed. Algorithms which use genetic and functional diagnostic tests to distinguish CF and CFTR-RDs are presented. According to present knowledge, congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens (CBAVD), acute recurrent or chronic pancreatitis and disseminated bronchiectasis, all with CFTR dysfunction, are CFTR-RDs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations –citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.