Breadth of Genetic Testing Selected by Patients at Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

被引:9
作者
Szender, J. Brian [1 ,2 ]
Kaur, Jasmine [1 ]
Clayback, Katherine [3 ]
Hutton, Mollie L. [4 ]
Mikkelson, June [4 ]
Odunsi, Kunle [1 ,5 ]
Dresbold, Cara [6 ]
机构
[1] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Gynecol Oncol, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[2] SUNY Buffalo, Sch Publ Hlth & Hlth Profess, Dept Epidemiol & Environm Hlth, Buffalo, NY USA
[3] John Carroll Univ, University Hts, OH USA
[4] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Clin Genet Serv, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[5] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Ctr Immunotherapy, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[6] Community Phys Network Breast Care, Indianapolis, IN USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Cancer risk; Genetic counseling; Hereditary cancers; STATEMENT; OUTCOMES; SOCIETY;
D O I
10.1097/IGC.0000000000001122
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of patients at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome to select the extent of genetic testing personally preferred and the impact of demographic factors on the breadth of testing pursued. Methods A single-institution cohort was enumerated consisting of patients referred for clinical genetic counseling secondary to risk of HBOC syndrome. This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients seen for genetic counseling; all patients completed an epidemiologic questionnaire and provided personal and family medical histories. Patients meeting guidelines for testing were offered testing at 3 levels: single gene/condition (Single), small panels with highly penetrant genes (Plus), and large panels with high and moderately penetrant genes (Next). Associations between personal or family-related factors and breadth of testing selected were investigated. Continuous and categorical variables were compared using Student t and (2) tests, as appropriate. Joint classification tables were used to test for effect modification, and a log-binomial model was used to compute rate ratios (RR) with a threshold of P < 0.05 considered significant. Results We identified 253 patients who underwent genetic counseling for HBOC syndrome. Most patients were personally affected by cancer (63.6%), reported at least some college (79.2%), met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for BRCA testing (94.5%), and opted to undergo genetic testing (94.1%). Most (84.9%) patients opted for panel testing. An increased likelihood of choosing Next-level testing was found to be associated with patients having any college experience (RR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.30), as well as being unaffected by cancer (RR, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.64). Conclusions Clinical genetic counseling is a highly specialized service, which should be provided to patients at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes. Although some epidemiologic factors can predict a patient's preference for testing breadth, patients were sufficiently able to self-identify the level of testing they were comfortable with after receiving genetic counseling. Most practitioners do not have the time or expertise to provide the degree of counseling needed to enable and empower patients to choose the level of testing they are comfortable with. When available, referral to genetic counselors remains an important component of comprehensive care for women with a personal or family history of cancer suggestive of hereditary risk.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 33
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2009, Obstet Gynecol, V113, P957, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181a106d4
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2015, Final Update Summary: Skin Cancer: Screening
  • [3] Utilization and Outcomes of BRCA Genetic Testing and Counseling in a National Commercially Insured Population The ABOUT Study
    Armstrong, Joanne
    Toscano, Michele
    Kotchko, Nancy
    Friedman, Sue
    Schwartz, Marc D.
    Virgo, Katherine S.
    Lynch, Kristian
    Andrews, James E.
    Loi, Claudia X. Aguado
    Bauer, Joseph E.
    Casares, Carolina
    Clark, Elizabeth Bourquardez
    Kondoff, Matthew R.
    Molina, Ashley D.
    Abdollahian, Mehrnaz
    Walker, Gregg
    Sutphen, Rebecca
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2015, 1 (09) : 1251 - 1260
  • [4] Armstrong K, 2000, CANCER EPIDEM BIOMAR, V9, P1251
  • [5] NSGC Practice Guideline: Risk Assessment and Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer
    Berliner, Janice L.
    Fay, Angela Musial
    Cummings, Shelly A.
    Burnett, Brittany
    Tillmanns, Todd
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2013, 22 (02) : 155 - 163
  • [6] American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility
    Bruinooge, SS
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2003, 21 (12) : 2397 - 2406
  • [7] Clinical Actionability of Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk Assessment
    Desmond, Andrea
    Kurian, AllisonW.
    Gabree, Michele
    Mills, Meredith A.
    Anderson, Michael J.
    Kobayashi, Yuya
    Horick, Nora
    Yang, Shan
    Shannon, Kristen M.
    Tung, Nadine
    Ford, JamesM.
    Lincoln, Stephen E.
    Ellisen, Leifw.
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2015, 1 (07) : 943 - 951
  • [8] Adherence patterns to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for referral to cancer genetic professionals
    Febbraro, Terri
    Robison, Katina
    Wilbur, Jennifer Scalia
    Laprise, Jessica
    Bregar, Amy
    Lopes, Vrishali
    Legare, Robert
    Stuckey, Ashley
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2015, 138 (01) : 109 - 114
  • [9] Rescreening for genetic mutations using multi-gene panel testing in patients who previously underwent non-informative genetic screening
    Frey, Melissa K.
    Kim, Sarah H.
    Bassett, Rebecca Yee
    Martineau, Jessica
    Dalton, Emily
    Chern, Jing-Yi
    Blank, Stephanie V.
    [J]. GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2015, 139 (02) : 211 - 215
  • [10] Patient preferences of decision-making in the context of genetic testing for breast cancer risk
    Helmes, AW
    Bowen, DJ
    Bengel, J
    [J]. GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2002, 4 (03) : 150 - 157