Literature DB >> 29164969

Accuracy of self-reported family history of cancer, mutation status and tumor characteristics in patients with early onset breast cancer.

Annelie Augustinsson1, Carolina Ellberg1, Ulf Kristoffersson2, Åke Borg1, Håkan Olsson1,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the concordance between self-reported and registry-reported information regarding family history of breast cancer (BC), ovarian cancer (OvC) and other types of cancer in first-degree relatives of patients with early onset BC, and to determine the frequency of mutation carriers and non-mutation carriers. The secondary objective was to describe tumor characteristics for each mutation group.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1993 and 2013, 231 women who were ≤35 years old when diagnosed with BC were registered at the Oncogenetic Clinic at Skåne University Hospital in Lund, Sweden. Self-reported and registry-reported information regarding first-degree family history of cancer was collected together with information regarding tumor characteristics.
RESULTS: Almost perfect agreement was observed between self-reported and registry-reported information regarding first-degree family history of BC (κ = 0.92) and OvC (κ = 0.86). Lesser agreement was observed between reports regarding family history of other types of cancer (κ = 0.51). Mutation screening revealed pathogenic germline mutations in 30.4%; 18.8% in BRCA1, 7.1% in BRCA2 and 4.5% in other genes. Compared with other mutation groups, BRCA1 mutation carriers were more likely to be diagnosed with high-grade, ER-, PR- and triple-negative tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that physicians and genetic counselors can rely on self-reported information regarding BC and OvC in first-degree relatives. However, self-reported information regarding other types of cancer is not communicated as effectively, and there should be more focus on retrieving the correct information regarding family history of all tumor types. Furthermore, we observed that even though all BC patients fulfilled the criteria for genetic counseling and testing, a large number of patients diagnosed at ≤35 years of age did not receive genetic counseling at the Oncogenetic Clinic. This finding merits further elucidation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29164969     DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2017.1404635

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Oncol        ISSN: 0284-186X            Impact factor:   4.089


  10 in total

1.  Electronically ascertained extended pedigrees in breast cancer genetic counseling.

Authors:  V Stefansdottir; H Skirton; O Th Johannsson; H Olafsdottir; G H Olafsdottir; L Tryggvadottir; J J Jonsson
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.375

2.  Variations in the Referral Pattern for Genetic Counseling of Patients with Early-Onset Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study in Southern Sweden.

Authors:  Annelie Augustinsson; Carolina Ellberg; Ulf Kristoffersson; Håkan Olsson; Hans Ehrencrona
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 2.000

3.  Race/Ethnicity and Accuracy of Self-Reported Female First-Degree Family History of Breast and Other Cancers in the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Authors:  Esther M John; Alison J Canchola; Meera Sangaramoorthy; Jocelyn Koo; Alice S Whittemore; Dee W West
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 4.  Implementation and implications for polygenic risk scores in healthcare.

Authors:  John L Slunecka; Matthijs D van der Zee; Jeffrey J Beck; Brandon N Johnson; Casey T Finnicum; René Pool; Jouke-Jan Hottenga; Eco J C de Geus; Erik A Ehli
Journal:  Hum Genomics       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 4.639

5.  Mainstreamed genetic testing of breast cancer patients in two hospitals in South Eastern Norway.

Authors:  Eli Marie Grindedal; Kjersti Jørgensen; Pernilla Olsson; Berit Gravdehaug; Hilde Lurås; Ellen Schlichting; Tone Vamre; Teresia Wangensteen; Cecilie Heramb; Lovise Mæhle
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Familial occurrence of mitral regurgitation in patients with mitral valve prolapse undergoing mitral valve surgery.

Authors:  Yasmine L Hiemstra; Aniek L van Wijngaarden; Mathilde W Bos; Martin J Schalij; Robert Jm Klautz; Jeroen J Bax; Victoria Delgado; Daniela Qcm Barge-Schaapveld; Nina Ajmone Marsan
Journal:  Eur J Prev Cardiol       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 7.804

7.  Half of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants found on panel tests do not fulfil NHS testing criteria.

Authors:  Tala Andoni; Jennifer Wiggins; Rachel Robinson; Ruth Charlton; Michael Sandberg; Rosalind Eeles
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 8.  Risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

Authors:  George U Eleje; Ahizechukwu C Eke; Ifeanyichukwu U Ezebialu; Joseph I Ikechebelu; Emmanuel O Ugwu; Onyinye O Okonkwo
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-08-24

9.  Incidence of Pathogenic Variants in Those With a Family History of Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Sarah K Macklin; Pashtoon M Kasi; Jessica L Jackson; Stephanie L Hines
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  Genetic testing in women with early-onset breast cancer: a Traceback pilot study.

Authors:  Annelie Augustinsson; Martin P Nilsson; Carolina Ellberg; Ulf Kristoffersson; Håkan Olsson; Hans Ehrencrona
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 4.872

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.