Literature DB >> 28132390

Impact of self-reported data on the acquisition of multi-generational family history and lifestyle factors among women seen in a high-risk breast screening program: a focus on modifiable risk factors and genetic referral.

Laura H Rosenberger1, Ryan Weber2, Daniel Sjoberg2, Andrew J Vickers2, Debra A Mangino1, Monica Morrow1, Melissa L Pilewskie3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The phrase "high-risk for breast cancer" is used to identify various groups at elevated cancer risk, and the appropriate surveillance and risk-reducing strategies differ based on the etiology of risk. Here, we review the utility of patient-reported data to capture women with modifiable lifestyle risk factors and those suitable for genetic counseling referral.
METHODS: Patient-reported data from a web-based survey were used to capture personal history, multi-generational family history, and lifestyle factors (body mass index, alcohol consumption, physical activity). Responses were tabulated, and percentage of patients who met criteria for possible intervention calculated.
RESULTS: 1277 women completed the survey from October 2014 to December 2015. Women were considered high risk for a combination of the following: family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer (77%), history of atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (35%), known breast cancer-related gene mutation (11%). Based on self-reported data, 65% qualified for genetic evaluation but 40% reporting no prior testing. Only half of the population met national physical activity recommendations, nearly 40% were overweight/obese, and 18% reported consuming ≥1 alcoholic beverage per day.
CONCLUSIONS: Among women followed in a high-risk breast surveillance program, there is considerable opportunity for improved genetic referral and awareness of modifiable lifestyle factors based on self-reported data as 60% of respondents reported a possible area for intervention. While risk reduction associated with lifestyle changes is modest in comparison to chemoprevention or surgery, such changes are practically without risk, minimally expensive, and provide innumerable secondary health benefits.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer risk; Genetic testing; Health behavior; Lifestyle

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28132390      PMCID: PMC5332545          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-017-4115-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  34 in total

1.  Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Paul E Goss; James N Ingle; José E Alés-Martínez; Angela M Cheung; Rowan T Chlebowski; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Anne McTiernan; John Robbins; Karen C Johnson; Lisa W Martin; Eric Winquist; Gloria E Sarto; Judy E Garber; Carol J Fabian; Pascal Pujol; Elizabeth Maunsell; Patricia Farmer; Karen A Gelmon; Dongsheng Tu; Harriet Richardson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Prophylactic mastectomy of the contralateral breast.

Authors:  Monica Morrow
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.380

3.  Effects of tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial.

Authors:  Victor G Vogel; Joseph P Costantino; D Lawrence Wickerham; Walter M Cronin; Reena S Cecchini; James N Atkins; Therese B Bevers; Louis Fehrenbacher; Eduardo R Pajon; James L Wade; André Robidoux; Richard G Margolese; Joan James; Scott M Lippman; Carolyn D Runowicz; Patricia A Ganz; Steven E Reis; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Leslie G Ford; V Craig Jordan; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  Alcohol and breast cancer: review of epidemiologic and experimental evidence and potential mechanisms.

Authors:  K W Singletary; S M Gapstur
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-11-07       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study.

Authors:  Bernard Fisher; Joseph P Costantino; D Lawrence Wickerham; Reena S Cecchini; Walter M Cronin; Andre Robidoux; Therese B Bevers; Maureen T Kavanah; James N Atkins; Richard G Margolese; Carolyn D Runowicz; Joan M James; Leslie G Ford; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  American Cancer Society Guidelines on nutrition and physical activity for cancer prevention: reducing the risk of cancer with healthy food choices and physical activity.

Authors:  Lawrence H Kushi; Colleen Doyle; Marji McCullough; Cheryl L Rock; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Elisa V Bandera; Susan Gapstur; Alpa V Patel; Kimberly Andrews; Ted Gansler
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 7.  Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer.

Authors:  L Lostumbo; N Carbine; J Wallace; J Ezzo
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004-10-18

Review 8.  Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ellen Warner; Hans Messersmith; Petrina Causer; Andrea Eisen; Rene Shumak; Donald Plewes
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Survival of patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancer diagnosed in an MRI-based surveillance program.

Authors:  Pål Møller; Astrid Stormorken; Christoffer Jonsrud; Marit Muri Holmen; Anne Irene Hagen; Neal Clark; Anita Vabø; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod; Lovise Mæhle
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Risk of second breast cancer in female Hodgkin's lymphoma survivors: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ezzeldin M Ibrahim; Khaled M Abouelkhair; Ghieth A Kazkaz; Osama A Elmasri; Meteb Al-Foheidi
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2012-05-28       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.