Literature DB >> 25485012

Knowledge of genetic testing for hereditary kidney cancer in Canada is lacking: The results of the Canadian national hereditary kidney cancer needs assessment survey.

Philippe D Violette1, Suzanne Kamel-Reid2, Gail E Graham3, M Neil Reaume4, Michael A Jewett5, Melanie Care6, Joan Basiuk7, Stephen E Pautler8.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTON: Treatment of hereditary renal cell carcinoma (HRCC) requires a multidisciplinary approach that may involve medical oncologists, geneticists, genetic counsellors, and urologists. The objective of our survey was to obtain current and representative information about the use and perceived importance of genetic testing for HRCC in Canada.
METHODS: A self-administered web-based survey was provided to Canadian medical oncologists, geneticists, genetic counsellors, and urologists in collaboration with their respective associations. The survey was created through an iterative process in consultation with the Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada and contained both quantitative and qualitative components. The survey was designed to be exploratory and results were compared across regions.
RESULTS: The overall response was low (6.6%). Of the respondents, 42%, 33%, 19%, 5% were genetic counsellors, urologists, medical oncologists and medical geneticists, respectively. Of the respondents, 62.7% described their practice as academic, and 37.3% described it as non-academic. Non-academic respondents tended to refer for genetic counselling less frequently than academic (48.6% vs. 67.2%). Most respondents believed that genetic testing for HRCC was available (82.8%), although 47.7% did not know which tests were available. This observation was consistent across provinces. Testing for Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome was given the highest priority among respondents. Limited provider knowledge, clinical guidelines, institutional funding, access, and poor coordination between disciplines were cited as barriers to testing.
INTERPRETATION: There is a need to increase provider knowledge of genetic testing for HRCC. These findings support the development of practice guidelines and national strategies to improve coordination of specialists and access to genetics services. Limitations of the present study include low survey response which did not allow for inferential analysis by geographic region or respondent specialty.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 25485012      PMCID: PMC4250249          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.2415

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  31 in total

1.  Tumor heterogeneity and personalized medicine.

Authors:  Dan L Longo
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  The wide gap between genetic research and clinical needs.

Authors:  Ann Silversides
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-01-30       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Familial renal carcinoma: clinical evaluation, clinical subtypes and risk of renal carcinoma development.

Authors:  Berton Zbar; Gladys Glenn; Maria Merino; Lindsay Middelton; James Peterson; Jorge Toro; Jonathan Coleman; Peter Pinto; Laura S Schmidt; Peter Choyke; W Marston Linehan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  A centralized approach to out-of-province genetic testing leads to cost savings: the Alberta experience.

Authors:  M Lilley; S Christian; P Blumenschein; S Chan; M Somerville
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 5.  Hereditary renal cancer syndromes: an update of a systematic review.

Authors:  Jérôme Verine; Amélie Pluvinage; Guilhem Bousquet; Jacqueline Lehmann-Che; Cédric de Bazelaire; Nadem Soufir; Pierre Mongiat-Artus
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 6.  The current status of tailor-made medicine with molecular biomarkers for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Sunao Shoji; Mayura Nakano; Haruhiro Sato; Xian Yang Tang; Yoshiyuki Robert Osamura; Toshiro Terachi; Toyoaki Uchida; Koichi Takeya
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.150

Review 7.  Genetic testing by cancer site: urinary tract.

Authors:  Gayun Chan-Smutko
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

8.  Succinate dehydrogenase kidney cancer: an aggressive example of the Warburg effect in cancer.

Authors:  Christopher J Ricketts; Brian Shuch; Cathy D Vocke; Adam R Metwalli; Gennady Bratslavsky; Lindsay Middelton; Youfeng Yang; Ming-Hui Wei; Stephen E Pautler; James Peterson; Catherine A Stolle; Berton Zbar; Maria J Merino; Laura S Schmidt; Peter A Pinto; Ramaprasad Srinivasan; Karel Pacak; W Marston Linehan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Postal survey of physicians and laboratories: practices and perceptions of molecular oncology testing.

Authors:  Fiona A Miller; Paul Krueger; Robert J Christensen; Catherine Ahern; Ronald F Carter; Suzanne Kamel-Reid
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Factors influencing organizational adoption and implementation of clinical genetic services.

Authors:  Alison B Hamilton; Sabine Oishi; Elizabeth M Yano; Cynthia E Gammage; Nell J Marshall; Maren T Scheuner
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Renal cell cancers: unveiling the hereditary ones and saving lives-a tailored diagnostic approach.

Authors:  Georgios Kallinikas; Helai Habib; Dimitrios Tsimiliotis; Evangelos Koutsokostas; Barna Bokor
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 2.370

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.