Literature DB >> 23748176

Timing of referral for genetic counseling and genetic testing in patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma.

Akiva P Novetsky1, Kylie Smith, Sheri A Babb, Donna B Jeffe, Andrea R Hagemann, Premal H Thaker, Matthew A Powell, David G Mutch, L Stewart Massad, Israel Zighelboim.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess patients' preferences of the timing of referral for genetic counseling and testing in relation to the diagnosis, treatment, and recurrence of ovarian, tubal, or primary peritoneal cancers.
METHODS: Ninety-two patients who underwent counseling and testing by 1 certified genetic counselor were identified. An introductory letter, consent form, and questionnaire were mailed to gather information regarding factors influencing the decision to undergo genetic counseling and testing and opinions regarding optimal timing. Medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data.
RESULTS: Of 47 consenting women, 45 underwent testing. Eight (18%) were found to have a genetic mutation. Women lacked consensus about the optimal time for referral for and to undergo genetic testing, although women with stage I disease preferred testing after completion of chemotherapy. Most women were comfortable receiving the results by phone, but one third preferred an office visit.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients' views regarding the best time to be referred for and undergo counseling and testing varied greatly. Because of the high mortality of this disease, clinicians should discuss referral early and personalize the timing to each patient. The subset of patients who prefer results disclosure during an office visit should be identified at the time of their initial counseling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23748176      PMCID: PMC3864646          DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182994365

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  29 in total

1.  BRCA mutation status and determinant of outcome in women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer treated with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin.

Authors:  Tamar Safra; Lucia Borgato; Maria Ornella Nicoletto; Linda Rolnitzky; Sharon Pelles-Avraham; Ravit Geva; Martin Edward Donach; John Curtin; Akiva Novetsky; Tal Grenader; Wei-Chu V Lai; Alberto Gabizon; Leslie Boyd; Franco Muggia
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 6.261

2.  Clinicopathologic features of BRCA-linked and sporadic ovarian cancer.

Authors:  J Boyd; Y Sonoda; M G Federici; F Bogomolniy; E Rhei; D L Maresco; P E Saigo; L A Almadrones; R R Barakat; C L Brown; D S Chi; J P Curtin; E A Poynor; W J Hoskins
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-05-03       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  There is no decision to make: experiences and attitudes toward treatment-focused genetic testing among women diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  B Meiser; M Gleeson; N Kasparian; K Barlow-Stewart; M Ryan; K Watts; D Menon; G Mitchell; K Tucker
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 5.482

4.  Gene expression profile of BRCAness that correlates with responsiveness to chemotherapy and with outcome in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Panagiotis A Konstantinopoulos; Dimitrios Spentzos; Beth Y Karlan; Toshiyasu Taniguchi; Elena Fountzilas; Nancy Francoeur; Douglas A Levine; Stephen A Cannistra
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  BRCA mutation frequency and patterns of treatment response in BRCA mutation-positive women with ovarian cancer: a report from the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group.

Authors:  Kathryn Alsop; Sian Fereday; Cliff Meldrum; Anna deFazio; Catherine Emmanuel; Joshy George; Alexander Dobrovic; Michael J Birrer; Penelope M Webb; Colin Stewart; Michael Friedlander; Stephen Fox; David Bowtell; Gillian Mitchell
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Breast cancer genetic counseling after diagnosis but before treatment: a pilot study on treatment consequences and psychological impact.

Authors:  Marijke R Wevers; Daniela E E Hahn; Senno Verhoef; Marijke D K Bolhaar; Margreet G E M Ausems; Neil K Aaronson; Eveline M A Bleiker
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2012-04-28

7.  A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for women considering genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer risk.

Authors:  Claire E Wakefield; Bettina Meiser; Judi Homewood; Michelle Peate; Alan Taylor; Elizabeth Lobb; Judy Kirk; Mary-Anne Young; Rachel Williams; Tracy Dudding; Kathy Tucker
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  BRCA-mutation-associated fallopian tube carcinoma: a distinct clinical phenotype?

Authors:  Ilana Cass; Christine Holschneider; Nandini Datta; Denise Barbuto; Ann E Walts; Beth Y Karlan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Genetic heterogeneity and localization of a familial breast-ovarian cancer gene on chromosome 17q12-q21.

Authors:  S A Smith; D F Easton; D Ford; J Peto; K Anderson; D Averill; M Stratton; M Ponder; C Pye; B A Ponder
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  A randomized trial of a breast/ovarian cancer genetic testing decision aid used as a communication aid during genetic counseling.

Authors:  Claire E Wakefield; Bettina Meiser; Judi Homewood; Alan Taylor; Margaret Gleeson; Rachel Williams; Kathy Tucker
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.894

View more
  3 in total

1.  Mainstreaming genetics in palliative care: barriers and suggestions for clinical genetic services.

Authors:  A Dearing; N Taverner
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-11-20

2.  Improving referral for genetic risk assessment in ovarian cancer using an electronic medical record system.

Authors:  Sue V Petzel; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Jena McNiel; Anna Leininger; Peter A Argenta; Melissa A Geller
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.437

3.  Whether, when, how, and how much? General public's and cancer patients' views about the disclosure of genomic secondary findings.

Authors:  Jude Emmanuel Cléophat; Michel Dorval; Zaki El Haffaf; Jocelyne Chiquette; Stephanie Collins; Benjamin Malo; Vincent Fradet; Yann Joly; Hermann Nabi
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 3.063

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.