Literature DB >> 23345056

Comparison of the screening practices of unaffected noncarriers under 40 and between 40 and 49 in BRCA1/2 families.

Christelle Duprez1, Véronique Christophe, Isabelle Milhabet, Aurélie Krzeminski, Claude Adenis, Pascaline Berthet, Jean-Philippe Peyrat, Philippe Vennin.   

Abstract

This study aimed to 1) compare the cancer screening practices of unaffected noncarrier women under 40 and those aged 40 to 49, following the age-based medical screening guidelines, and 2) consider the way the patients justified their practices of screening or over-screening. For this study, 131 unaffected noncarriers-77 women under age 40 and 54 between 40 and 49, all belonging to a BRCA1/2 family-responded to a questionnaire on breast or ovarian cancer screenings they had undergone since receiving their negative genetic test results, their motives for seeking these screenings, and their intentions to pursue these screenings in the future. Unaffected noncarriers under age 40 admitted practices that could be qualified as over-screening. Apart from mammogram and breast ultrasounds, which the women under 40 reported seeking less often, these women's screening practices were comparable to those of women between 40 and 49. Cancer prevention and a family history of cancer were the two most frequently cited justifications for pursuing these screenings. We suggest that health care professionals discuss with women under 50 the ineffectiveness of breast and ovarian cancer screenings so that they will adapt their practices to conform to medical guidelines and limit their exposure to the potentially negative impacts of early cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23345056     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-012-9569-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  64 in total

1.  Efficacy of mammography for detecting early breast cancer in women under 50.

Authors:  T Yokoe; Y Iino; M Maemura; H Takei; J Horiguchi; H Matsumoto; Y Morishita; Y Koibuchi
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.480

2.  Mammography utilization in women aged 40-49 years: the French EDIFICE survey.

Authors:  Xavier Pivot; François Eisinger; Jean-Yves Blay; Yvan Coscas; Anne Calazel-Benque; Jérôme Viguier; Claire Roussel; Jean-François Morère
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.497

3.  Patient adherence to family practitioners' recommendations for breast cancer screening: a historical cohort study.

Authors:  S Giveon; E Kahan
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.267

4.  What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review.

Authors:  K D McCaul; A D Branstetter; D M Schroeder; R E Glasgow
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.267

5.  Two distinct groups of non-attenders in an organized mammography screening program.

Authors:  A R Aro; H J de Koning; P Absetz; M Schreck
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  [Radiation risk associated with mammography screening examinations for women younger than 50 years of age].

Authors:  Elke A Nekolla; Jürgen Griebel; Gunnar Brix
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.820

7.  Characterization of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a large United States sample.

Authors:  Sining Chen; Edwin S Iversen; Tara Friebel; Dianne Finkelstein; Barbara L Weber; Andrea Eisen; Leif E Peterson; Joellen M Schildkraut; Claudine Isaacs; Beth N Peshkin; Camille Corio; Leoni Leondaridis; Gail Tomlinson; Debra Dutson; Rich Kerber; Christopher I Amos; Louise C Strong; Donald A Berry; David M Euhus; Giovanni Parmigiani
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Breast cancer screening for women younger than 40.

Authors:  A F Gili; Z Poonja; B B Kalra
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 3.275

9.  Screening adherence in BRCA1/2 families is associated with primary physicians' behavior.

Authors:  Susan T Tinley; Julia Houfek; Patrice Watson; Lari Wenzel; Mary Beth Clark; Susan Coughlin; Henry T Lynch
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2004-02-15       Impact factor: 2.802

10.  Cancer risk management practices of noncarriers within BRCA1/2 mutation positive families in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Sarah-Jane Dawson; Melanie A Price; Mark A Jenkins; Joanne M McKinley; Phyllis N Butow; Sue-Anne McLachlan; Geoffrey J Lindeman; Prue Weideman; Michael L Friedlander; John L Hopper; Kelly-Anne Phillips
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  2 in total

1.  No evidence of excessive cancer screening in female noncarriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families.

Authors:  S Guedaoura; S Pelletier; W D Foulkes; P Hamet; J Simard; N Wong; Z El Haffaf; J Chiquette; M Dorval
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Clinical follow-up and breast and ovarian cancer screening of true BRCA1/2 noncarriers: a qualitative investigation.

Authors:  Sylvie Pelletier; Nora Wong; Zaki El Haffaf; William D Foulkes; Jocelyne Chiquette; Pavel Hamet; Jacques Simard; Michel Dorval
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 8.822

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.