Literature DB >> 31196574

Differences in referral patterns based on race for women at high-risk for ovarian cancer in the southeast: Results from a Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic.

Teresa K L Boitano1, David A Barrington1, Sadhvi Batra2, Gerald McGwin3, Taylor B Turner4, Meagan B Farmer5, Aimee M Brown5, Michael J Straughn4, Charles A Leath6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare referral patterns, genetic testing and pathogenic variant rates in Black women (BW) and White women (WW) in a large academic Gynecologic Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic (GCRAC).
METHODS: Cross sectional study of an IRB-approved prospective, cohort study from a GCRAC. Data evaluated included: age, race, referral provider specialty and indication, genetic testing frequency, as well as frequency and types of pathogenic variants.
RESULTS: 588 WW and 57 BW were evaluated from 1/2010-12/2015. Although approximately one-third of BW and WW were referred for family history alone, referral indications varied. BW were more likely referred for a known pathogenic variant (20.0% vs. 6.2%) although less likely referred for a personal history of ovarian cancer (24.0% vs. 46.8%; p = 0.0023). While gynecologic oncologists referred most patients (BW 43.6% vs. WW 63.0%), BW were more likely to be referred by surgical oncologist (23.0% vs. 12.8%) or genetic counselor (12.8% vs. 5.9%) than WW (p = 0.0234). Referral from non-OBGYN primary care providers was <3% in both groups. Genetic testing rates were similar in both races (82.4% vs. 85.5%). Rates of BRCA1 mutations (12.7% vs. 11.5%) were similar; however, BW had more BRCA2 mutations (21.3% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.0194).
CONCLUSIONS: Since BW are more likely to be referred by surgical oncology or genetics counselor, breast clinics might be an entry point to ensure genetic counseling and testing. Continued efforts to increase awareness regarding the importance of patient referral at the primary care level may help identify the subset of women not currently undergoing counseling and testing.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  African Americans; Genetic predisposition; Genetic testing; Ovarian cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31196574      PMCID: PMC6685529          DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.05.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  24 in total

1.  Cancer statistics, 2018.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 2.  Moving toward personalized medicine: treatment-focused genetic testing of women newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Alison H Trainer; Bettina Meiser; Kaaren Watts; Gillian Mitchell; Kathy Tucker; Michael Friedlander
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.437

3.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2017.

Authors:  Mary B Daly; Robert Pilarski; Michael Berry; Saundra S Buys; Meagan Farmer; Susan Friedman; Judy E Garber; Noah D Kauff; Seema Khan; Catherine Klein; Wendy Kohlmann; Allison Kurian; Jennifer K Litton; Lisa Madlensky; Sofia D Merajver; Kenneth Offit; Tuya Pal; Gwen Reiser; Kristen Mahoney Shannon; Elizabeth Swisher; Shaveta Vinayak; Nicoleta C Voian; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Myra J Wick; Georgia L Wiesner; Mary Dwyer; Susan Darlow
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 11.908

4.  BRCA sequencing and large rearrangement testing in young Black women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Tuya Pal; Devon Bonner; Deborah Cragun; Sharland Johnson; Mohammad Akbari; Lily Servais; Steven Narod; Susan Vadaparampil
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-08-29

5.  Recent Trends in Ovarian Cancer Incidence and Relative Survival in the United States by Race/Ethnicity and Histologic Subtypes.

Authors:  Hyo K Park; Julie J Ruterbusch; Michele L Cote
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Salpingo-oophorectomy and the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancers in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation.

Authors:  Amy Finch; Mario Beiner; Jan Lubinski; Henry T Lynch; Pal Moller; Barry Rosen; Joan Murphy; Parviz Ghadirian; Eitan Friedman; William D Foulkes; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Teresa Wagner; Nadine Tung; Fergus Couch; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Peter Ainsworth; Mary Daly; Babara Pasini; Ruth Gershoni-Baruch; Charis Eng; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Jane McLennan; Beth Karlan; Jeffrey Weitzel; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  Risk reduction and survival benefit of prophylactic surgery in BRCA mutation carriers, a systematic review.

Authors:  Kandice K Ludwig; Joan Neuner; Annabelle Butler; Jennifer L Geurts; Amanda L Kong
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 2.565

8.  Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast and gynecologic cancer: a multicenter, prospective study.

Authors:  Noah D Kauff; Susan M Domchek; Tara M Friebel; Mark E Robson; Johanna Lee; Judy E Garber; Claudine Isaacs; D Gareth Evans; Henry Lynch; Rosalind A Eeles; Susan L Neuhausen; Mary B Daly; Ellen Matloff; Joanne L Blum; Paul Sabbatini; Richard R Barakat; Clifford Hudis; Larry Norton; Kenneth Offit; Timothy R Rebbeck
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-11       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  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

Review 10.  Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: a meta-analysis on impact on ovarian cancer risk and all cause mortality in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Claudia Marchetti; Francesca De Felice; Innocenza Palaia; Giorgia Perniola; Angela Musella; Daniela Musio; Ludovico Muzii; Vincenzo Tombolini; Pierluigi Benedetti Panici
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 2.809

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Nanotechnological approaches for diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer: a review of recent trends.

Authors:  Haigang Ding; Juan Zhang; Feng Zhang; Yan Xu; Wenqing Liang; Yijun Yu
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 6.819

2.  Reducing Disparities in Receipt of Genetic Counseling for Underserved Women at Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Arnethea L Sutton; Alejandra Hurtado-de-Mendoza; John Quillin; Lisa Rubinsak; Sarah M Temkin; Tamas Gal; Vanessa B Sheppard
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 2.681

3.  Retrospective assessment of barriers and access to genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes in an integrated health care delivery system.

Authors:  Kristin R Muessig; Jamilyn M Zepp; Erin Keast; Elizabeth E Shuster; Ana A Reyes; Briana Arnold; Chalinya Ingphakorn; Marian J Gilmore; Tia L Kauffman; Jessica Ezzell Hunter; Sarah Knerr; Heather S Feigelson; Katrina A B Goddard
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 2.857

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.