Literature DB >> 29528794

Gaps in Receipt of Clinically Indicated Genetic Counseling After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

Steven J Katz1, Kevin C Ward1, Ann S Hamilton1, M Chandler Mcleod1, Lauren P Wallner1, Monica Morrow1, Reshma Jagsi1, Sarah T Hawley1, Allison W Kurian1.   

Abstract

Purpose Little is known about the extent to which genetic counseling is integrated into community practices for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer. We examined the receipt of clinically indicated genetic counseling in these patients. Patients and Methods We surveyed 5,080 patients between the ages of 20 and 79 years, diagnosed from July 2013 to August 2015 with early-stage breast cancer and reported to the SEER registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were linked to SEER clinical data and genetic test results. The study sample (N = 1,711) comprised patients with indications for formal genetic risk evaluation. Results Overall, 47.4% did not get tested, 40.7% tested negative, 7.4% had a variant of uncertain significance only, and 4.5% had a pathogenic mutation. Three quarters (74.6%) received some form of genetic counseling (43.5%, formal counseling and 31.1%, physician-directed discussion). Virtually all tested patients (96.1%) reported some form of genetic discussion (62.2%, formal counseling and 33.9%, physician-directed discussion). However, only one half (50.6%) of those not tested received any discussion about genetics. Younger women were more likely to report some type of counseling, controlling for other factors: odds ratio, 4.5 (95% CI, 2.6 to 8.0); 1.9 (95% CI, 1.1 to 3.3); and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.0 to 2.3) for women younger than 50 years of age, 50 to 59 years of age, and 60 to 69 years of age versus those 70 years of age and older. Patients' assessments of the amount of information they received about whether to get tested were similarly high whether they were counseled by a genetics expert or by a physician only (80.8% v 79.4% stated information was just right, P = .59). Conclusion Less than one half (43.5%) of patients with clinical indications received formal genetic counseling. There is a large gap between mandates for timely pretest formal genetic counseling in higher-risk patients and the reality of practice today.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29528794      PMCID: PMC5908222          DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.2369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   50.717


  20 in total

1.  Genetic Testing: What Problem Are We Trying to Solve?

Authors:  Kevin S Hughes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 2.  Sociodemographic, psychosocial and clinical factors associated with uptake of genetic counselling for hereditary cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  A M Willis; S K Smith; B Meiser; M L Ballinger; D M Thomas; M-A Young
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2016-10-23       Impact factor: 4.438

3.  Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2015.

Authors:  Mary B Daly; Robert Pilarski; Jennifer E Axilbund; Michael Berry; Saundra S Buys; Beth Crawford; Meagan Farmer; Susan Friedman; Judy E Garber; Seema Khan; Catherine Klein; Wendy Kohlmann; Allison Kurian; Jennifer K Litton; Lisa Madlensky; P Kelly Marcom; Sofia D Merajver; Kenneth Offit; Tuya Pal; Huma Rana; Gwen Reiser; Mark E Robson; Kristen Mahoney Shannon; Elizabeth Swisher; Nicoleta C Voian; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Alison Whelan; Myra J Wick; Georgia L Wiesner; Mary Dwyer; Rashmi Kumar; Susan Darlow
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 11.908

4.  Quality of cancer family history and referral for genetic counseling and testing among oncology practices: a pilot test of quality measures as part of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative.

Authors:  Marie E Wood; Pamela Kadlubek; Trang H Pham; Dana S Wollins; Karen H Lu; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Michael N Neuss; Kevin S Hughes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Gene patents and personalized cancer care: impact of the Myriad case on clinical oncology.

Authors:  Kenneth Offit; Angela Bradbury; Courtney Storm; Jon F Merz; Kevin E Noonan; Rebecca Spence
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Physicians' attitudes about multiplex tumor genomic testing.

Authors:  Stacy W Gray; Katherine Hicks-Courant; Angel Cronin; Barrett J Rollins; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-03-24       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Genetic Testing and Counseling Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer .

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Kent A Griffith; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Monica Morrow; Steven J Katz; Reshma Jagsi
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 157.335

8.  Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Yun Li; Ann S Hamilton; Kevin C Ward; Sarah T Hawley; Monica Morrow; M Chandler McLeod; Reshma Jagsi; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 50.717

Review 9.  Breast Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Surgeon's Perspective.

Authors:  Doreen M Agnese; Raphael E Pollock
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2016-01-28

10.  Impact of rapid genetic counselling and testing on the decision to undergo immediate or delayed prophylactic mastectomy in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: findings from a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  M R Wevers; N K Aaronson; S Verhoef; E M A Bleiker; D E E Hahn; M A Kuenen; J van der Sanden-Melis; T Brouwer; F B L Hogervorst; R B van der Luijt; H B Valdimarsdottir; T van Dalen; E B M Theunissen; B van Ooijen; M A de Roos; P J Borgstein; B C Vrouenraets; E Vriens; W H Bouma; H Rijna; J P Vente; A J Witkamp; E J T Rutgers; M G E M Ausems
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  25 in total

1.  Genetic Testing and Results in a Population-Based Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients and Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Kevin C Ward; Nadia Howlader; Dennis Deapen; Ann S Hamilton; Angela Mariotto; Daniel Miller; Lynne S Penberthy; Steven J Katz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Promoting guideline-based cancer genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in ethnically and geographically diverse cancer survivors: Rationale and design of a 3-arm randomized controlled trial.

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

3.  Association of Attending Surgeon With Variation in the Receipt of Genetic Testing After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Steven J Katz; Irina Bondarenko; Kevin C Ward; Ann S Hamilton; Monica Morrow; Allison W Kurian; Timothy P Hofer
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Rate of BRCA mutation in patients tested under NCCN genetic testing criteria.

Authors:  Anna C Beck; Haimiao Yuan; Junlin Liao; Pamela Imperiale; Krysten Shipley; Lillian M Erdahl; Sonia L Sugg; Ronald J Weigel; Ingrid M Lizarraga
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2019-06-19       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Magnitude of reduction in risk of second contralateral breast cancer with bilateral mastectomy in patients with breast cancer: Data from California, 1998 through 2015.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Alison J Canchola; Cindy S Ma; Christina A Clarke; Scarlett L Gomez
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Predictors of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in genetically high risk newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Mara Tynan; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Shawna Willey; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Rachel Nusbaum; Gillian Hooker; Suzanne C O'Neill; Lina Jandorf; Scott P Kelly; Jessica Heinzmann; Sarah Kelleher; Elizabeth Poggi; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  Use and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Clinical Multigene Panel Testing for Cancer Susceptibility in the Multicenter Communication of Genetic Test Results by Telephone Study.

Authors:  Michael J Hall; Linda J Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Susan M Domchek; Mary B Daly; Pamela Ganschow; Generosa Grana; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Dominique Fetzer; Amanda Brandt; Rachelle Chambers; Dana F Clark; Andrea Forman; Rikki Gaber; Cassandra Gulden; Janice Horte; Jessica M Long; Terra Lucas; Shreshtha Madaan; Kristin Mattie; Danielle McKenna; Susan Montgomery; Sarah Nielsen; Jacquelyn Powers; Kim Rainey; Christina Rybak; Michelle Savage; Christina Seelaus; Jessica Stoll; Jill E Stopfer; Xinxin Shirley Yao; Angela R Bradbury
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2018-12-18

8.  Disparities in Genetic Testing and Care among Black women with Hereditary Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Sonya Reid; Sydney Cadiz; Tuya Pal
Journal:  Curr Breast Cancer Rep       Date:  2020-05-19

Review 9.  Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: An Advanced Personalized Multidisciplinary Prehabilitation Model (APMP-M) to Optimize Outcomes.

Authors:  Alba Di Leone; Daniela Terribile; Stefano Magno; Alejandro Martin Sanchez; Lorenzo Scardina; Elena Jane Mason; Sabatino D'Archi; Claudia Maggiore; Cristina Rossi; Annalisa Di Micco; Stefania Carnevale; Ida Paris; Fabio Marazzi; Valeria Masiello; Armando Orlandi; Antonella Palazzo; Alessandra Fabi; Riccardo Masetti; Gianluca Franceschini
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-04-21

10.  Screening High-Risk Women Veterans for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Yeun-Hee Anna Park; Alison Keller; Ta-Chueh Melody Hsu; Balmatee Bidassie; Vickie Venne; Douglas Hawley; Lori Hoffman-Högg; Bernadette Heron; Sarah Colonna; Anita Aggarwal
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2021-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.