PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess potential differences in genetic counseling services delivered by board-certified genetic health-care providers versus non-genetic health-care providers. We evaluated (i) patient recall and content of pretest genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and (ii) whether full BRCA1 and 2 gene sequencing was performed when less expensive single-site or Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation testing may have been sufficient. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire and provided BRCA test reports that included testing provider and type of test. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of 473 participants, >90% were white, female, and BRCA mutation carriers. Of the 276 (58%) with genetic health-care provider involvement, 97% recalled a pretest discussion as compared with 59% of those without genetic health-care provider involvement (P < 0.001). Among the subgroup who recalled a pretest discussion (n = 385), those with genetic health-care provider involvement indicated higher adherence to eight recognized genetic counseling elements, four of which were statistically significant. Furthermore, involvement of a genetic health-care provider halved the likelihood that comprehensive BRCA testing was ordered among the 266 for whom single-site or multisite-3 testing may have been sufficient (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that genetic health-care provider involvement is associated with adherence to nationally recommended genetic counseling practices and could potentially reduce costs of BRCA genetic testing.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess potential differences in genetic counseling services delivered by board-certified genetic health-care providers versus non-genetic health-care providers. We evaluated (i) patient recall and content of pretest genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and (ii) whether full BRCA1 and 2 gene sequencing was performed when less expensive single-site or Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation testing may have been sufficient. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire and provided BRCA test reports that included testing provider and type of test. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of 473 participants, >90% were white, female, and BRCA mutation carriers. Of the 276 (58%) with genetic health-care provider involvement, 97% recalled a pretest discussion as compared with 59% of those without genetic health-care provider involvement (P < 0.001). Among the subgroup who recalled a pretest discussion (n = 385), those with genetic health-care provider involvement indicated higher adherence to eight recognized genetic counseling elements, four of which were statistically significant. Furthermore, involvement of a genetic health-care provider halved the likelihood that comprehensive BRCA testing was ordered among the 266 for whom single-site or multisite-3 testing may have been sufficient (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that genetic health-care provider involvement is associated with adherence to nationally recommended genetic counseling practices and could potentially reduce costs of BRCA genetic testing.
Authors: T Pal; J-H Lee; A Besharat; Z Thompson; A N A Monteiro; C Phelan; J M Lancaster; K Metcalfe; T A Sellers; S Vadaparampil; S A Narod Journal: Clin Genet Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 4.438
Authors: Hetal S Vig; Joanne Armstrong; Brian L Egleston; Carla Mazar; Michele Toscano; Angela R Bradbury; Mary B Daly; Neal J Meropol Journal: Genet Test Mol Biomarkers Date: 2009-12
Authors: Michael J Hall; Julia E Reid; Lynn A Burbidge; Dmitry Pruss; Amie M Deffenbaugh; Cynthia Frye; Richard J Wenstrup; Brian E Ward; Thomas A Scholl; Walter W Noll Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Anita Y Kinney; Rachel Howell; Rachel Ruckman; Jean A McDougall; Tawny W Boyce; Belinda Vicuña; Ji-Hyun Lee; Dolores D Guest; Randi Rycroft; Patricia A Valverde; Kristina M Gallegos; Angela Meisner; Charles L Wiggins; Antoinette Stroup; Lisa E Paddock; Scott T Walters Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Evan J Walker; Julia Carnevale; Christina Pedley; Amie Blanco; Salina Chan; Eric A Collisson; Margaret A Tempero; Andrew H Ko Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Caroline M Weipert; Kerry A Ryan; Jessica N Everett; Beverly M Yashar; Arul M Chinnaiyan; J Scott Roberts; Raymond De Vries; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Victoria M Raymond Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Anita Y Kinney; Laurie E Steffen; Barbara H Brumbach; Wendy Kohlmann; Ruofei Du; Ji-Hyun Lee; Amanda Gammon; Karin Butler; Saundra S Buys; Antoinette M Stroup; Rebecca A Campo; Kristina G Flores; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Marc D Schwartz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Beth N Peshkin; Scott Kelly; Rachel H Nusbaum; Morgan Similuk; Tiffani A DeMarco; Gillian W Hooker; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Andrea D Forman; Jessica Rispoli Joines; Claire Davis; Shelley R McCormick; Wendy McKinnon; Kristi D Graves; Claudine Isaacs; Judy Garber; Marie Wood; Lina Jandorf; Marc D Schwartz Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Adrianne R Mallen; Claire C Conley; Lindsay Fuzzell; Dana Ketcher; Bianca M Augusto; McKenzie McIntyre; Laura V Barton; Mary K Townsend; Brooke L Fridley; Shelley S Tworoger; Robert M Wenham; Susan T Vadaparampil Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 3.603