Literature DB >> 34669096

Identification of women at risk of hereditary breast-ovarian cancer among participants in a population-based breast cancer screening.

Luigina Bonelli1, Ivana Valle2, Ivana Rebora2, Paola Ricci3, Lidia Biocchi3, Giovanna Bruschi3, Sabrina Parodi3, Carla Bruzzone4, Liliana Varesco4.   

Abstract

Women attending mammography screening may benefit from family history (FH) assessment for the identification of Hereditary Breast Ovarian Cancer (HBOC). Few studies explored the efficacy of tailored educational interventions in driving the attention on FH-associated risk among these women. To compare the efficacy of two educational tools in increasing attention towards FH, 6.802 women with a negative mammography were randomized to receive a note on FH of breast/ovarian cancer (letter A, n = 3.402) or a note with details on possible implication of FH patterns (letter B, n = 3.200). Upon women's request, a brief questionnaire was administered on phone at the Screening Unit (S.U.) to select those eligible for an in-depth FH evaluation at the Genetic Unit (G.U.). Each affected relative was scored 1-3 according to type of cancer, age at diagnosis, gender, position in the family tree. In all, 401 women contacted the S.U.: 244 (6.6%) in group A and 177 (5.2%) in group B (adjOR 1.27; 95%CI 1.03-1.56). FH scored ≥ 3 for 164 women: 177 (47.5%) in group B and 224 (35.7%) in group A, (adjOR 1.59, 95%CI 1.06-2.38). The G.U. traced and interviewed 148 women, 65 (43.9%) were offered an in-person consultation: 38 attended and 30 were eligible for testing. A test was performed for 24 women: no BRCA pathogenic variant was found. Among mammographic screening attendees, educational material with a simple description of FH may improve self-referral of women deserving an in-depth evaluation for HBOC identification. Additional educational efforts are needed to enhance the efficiency of the intervention.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetic counselling/testing; Genetic literacy; Hereditary breast–ovarian cancer; Population-based breast cancer screening; Risk assessment; Women information

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34669096     DOI: 10.1007/s10689-021-00281-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Cancer        ISSN: 1389-9600            Impact factor:   2.446


  18 in total

1.  Complementary approaches to assessing risk factors for interval breast cancer.

Authors:  Jan T Lowery; Tim Byers; John E Hokanson; John Kittelson; John Lewin; Betsy Risendal; Meenakshi Singh; Judy Mouchawar
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 2.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors:  M G Marmot; D G Altman; D A Cameron; J A Dewar; S G Thompson; M Wilcox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 7.640

3.  Breast cancer screening and overdiagnosis.

Authors:  Jean-Luc Bulliard; Anna-Belle Beau; Sisse Njorv; Wendy Yi-Ying Wu; Pietro Procopio; Carolyn Nickson; Elsebeth Lynge
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 7.396

4.  Breast-cancer screening--viewpoint of the IARC Working Group.

Authors:  Béatrice Lauby-Secretan; Chiara Scoccianti; Dana Loomis; Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa; Véronique Bouvard; Franca Bianchini; Kurt Straif
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Prevalence of BRCA1/2 germline mutations in 21 401 families with breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Karin Kast; Kerstin Rhiem; Barbara Wappenschmidt; Eric Hahnen; Jan Hauke; Britta Bluemcke; Verena Zarghooni; Natalie Herold; Nina Ditsch; Marion Kiechle; Michael Braun; Christine Fischer; Nicola Dikow; Sarah Schott; Nils Rahner; Dieter Niederacher; Tanja Fehm; Andrea Gehrig; Clemens Mueller-Reible; Norbert Arnold; Nicolai Maass; Guntram Borck; Nikolaus de Gregorio; Caroline Scholz; Bernd Auber; Raymonda Varon-Manteeva; Dorothee Speiser; Judit Horvath; Nadine Lichey; Pauline Wimberger; Sylvia Stark; Ulrike Faust; Bernhard H F Weber; Gunter Emons; Silke Zachariae; Alfons Meindl; Rita K Schmutzler; Christoph Engel
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 6.318

6.  Accuracy of breast screening among women with and without a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Erika Halapy; Anna M Chiarelli; Neil Klar; Julia A Knight
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  Mammographic breast density and breast cancer risk in a Mediterranean population: a nested case-control study in the EPIC Florence cohort.

Authors:  Giovanna Masala; Daniela Ambrogetti; Melania Assedi; Benedetta Bendinelli; Saverio Caini; Domenico Palli
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Mutation detection rates associated with specific selection criteria for BRCA1/2 testing in 1854 high-risk families: A monocentric Italian study.

Authors:  Jacopo Azzollini; Giulietta Scuvera; Eleonora Bruno; Patrizia Pasanisi; Daniela Zaffaroni; Mariarosaria Calvello; Barbara Pasini; Carla B Ripamonti; Mara Colombo; Valeria Pensotti; Paolo Radice; Bernard Peissel; Siranoush Manoukian
Journal:  Eur J Intern Med       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 4.487

9.  Risk factors for breast cancer in a cohort of mammographic screening program: a nested case-control study within the FRiCaM study.

Authors:  Francesca Bravi; Adriano Decarli; Antonio Giampiero Russo
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 4.452

10.  Population-Attributable Risk Proportion of Clinical Risk Factors for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Natalie J Engmann; Marzieh K Golmakani; Diana L Miglioretti; Brian L Sprague; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 31.777

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.