Debra T Linfield1, Michael B Rothberg2, Elizabeth R Pfoh2, Ryan Noss3, Lydia Cassard1, Joseph C Powers1, Laura Lipold4, Kathryn A Martinez5. 1. Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA. 2. Cleveland Clinic Center for Value-Based Care Research, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Desk G10, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 3. Center for Personalized Genetic Healthcare, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. 4. Department of Family Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. 5. Cleveland Clinic Center for Value-Based Care Research, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Desk G10, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. martink12@ccf.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends primary care physicians refer patients at high risk for BRCA1/2 mutations to genetic testing when appropriate. The objective of our study was to describe referrals for BRCA1/2 testing in a large integrated health system and to assess factors associated with referral. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study includes female patients between 18 and 50 years who had a primary care visit in the Cleveland Clinic Health System between 2010 and 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate differences in the odds of a woman being referred for BRCA1/2 testing by patient factors and referring physician specialty. We also assessed variation in referrals by physicians. RESULTS: Among 279,568 women, 5% were high risk. Of those, 22% were referred for testing. Black patients were significantly less likely to be referred than white patients (aOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77, 0.98) and Jewish patients were more likely to be referred than non-Jewish patients (aOR 2.13; 95% CI 1.68, 2.70). Patients primarily managed by OB/GYN were significantly more likely to be referred than those cared for via Internal/Family Medicine (aOR 1.45; 95% CI 1.30, 1.61). Less than a quarter of primary care physicians ever referred a patient for testing. CONCLUSION: The majority of primary care patients at high risk for a BRCA1/2 mutation were not referred for testing, and over a decade, most physicians never referred a single patient. Internal/Family Medicine physicians, in particular, need support in identifying and referring women who could benefit from testing.
PURPOSE: The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends primary care physicians refer patients at high risk for BRCA1/2 mutations to genetic testing when appropriate. The objective of our study was to describe referrals for BRCA1/2 testing in a large integrated health system and to assess factors associated with referral. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study includes female patients between 18 and 50 years who had a primary care visit in the Cleveland Clinic Health System between 2010 and 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate differences in the odds of a woman being referred for BRCA1/2 testing by patient factors and referring physician specialty. We also assessed variation in referrals by physicians. RESULTS: Among 279,568 women, 5% were high risk. Of those, 22% were referred for testing. Black patients were significantly less likely to be referred than white patients (aOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77, 0.98) and Jewish patients were more likely to be referred than non-Jewish patients (aOR 2.13; 95% CI 1.68, 2.70). Patients primarily managed by OB/GYN were significantly more likely to be referred than those cared for via Internal/Family Medicine (aOR 1.45; 95% CI 1.30, 1.61). Less than a quarter of primary care physicians ever referred a patient for testing. CONCLUSION: The majority of primary care patients at high risk for a BRCA1/2 mutation were not referred for testing, and over a decade, most physicians never referred a single patient. Internal/Family Medicine physicians, in particular, need support in identifying and referring women who could benefit from testing.
Authors: Douglas K Owens; Karina W Davidson; Alex H Krist; Michael J Barry; Michael Cabana; Aaron B Caughey; Chyke A Doubeni; John W Epling; Martha Kubik; C Seth Landefeld; Carol M Mangione; Lori Pbert; Michael Silverstein; Melissa A Simon; Chien-Wen Tseng; John B Wong Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christine Garcia; Jacqueline Wendt; Liisa Lyon; Jennifer Jones; Ramey D Littell; Mary Anne Armstrong; Tina Raine-Bennett; C Bethan Powell Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-12-16 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: John M Quillin; Alexander H Krist; Maria Gyure; Rosalie Corona; Vivian Rodriguez; Joseph Borzelleca; Joann N Bodurtha Journal: J Community Genet Date: 2013-07-20
Authors: Victoria H Coleman; Douglas W Laube; Ralph W Hale; Sterling B Williams; Michael L Power; Jay Schulkin Journal: Acad Med Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Alexander Liede; Mona Cai; Tamara Fidler Crouter; Daniela Niepel; Fiona Callaghan; D Gareth Evans Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Cecelia A Bellcross; Lucy A Peipins; Frances A McCarty; Juan L Rodriguez; Nikki A Hawkins; Sharon Hensley Alford; Steven Leadbetter Journal: Genet Med Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 8.822