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

被引:59
作者
Katz, Steven J. [1 ]
Ward, Kevin C. [3 ]
Hamilton, Ann S. [4 ]
Mcleod, M. Chandler [1 ]
Wallner, Lauren P. [1 ]
Morrow, Monica [6 ]
Jagsi, Reshma [1 ]
Hawley, Sarah T. [1 ,2 ]
Kurian, Allison W. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Ann Arbor VA Ctr Clin Management Res, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[3] Emory Univ, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
[4] Univ Southern Calif, Los Angeles, CA USA
[5] Stanford Univ, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[6] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
RISK ASSESSMENT BREAST; AMERICAN SOCIETY; NCCN GUIDELINES; OVARIAN-CANCER; ONCOLOGY; TRIAL; DECISION; MUTATION; HISTORY; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1200/JCO.2017.76.2369
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
PurposeLittle 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 MethodsWe 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.ResultsOverall, 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).ConclusionLess 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. (c) 2018 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
引用
收藏
页码:1218 / +
页数:9
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Breast Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Surgeon's Perspective [J].
Agnese, Doreen M. ;
Pollock, Raphael E. .
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2016, 3
[2]   Genetic Testing in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Room for Improvement [J].
Ahn, Soojin ;
Port, Elisa R. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (20) :2221-+
[3]   National Estimates of Genetic Testing in Women With a History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer [J].
Childers, Christopher P. ;
Childers, Kimberly K. ;
Maggard-Gibbons, Melinda ;
Macinko, James .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (34) :3800-+
[4]   NCCN Guidelines® Insights Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2017 Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines [J].
Daly, Mary B. ;
Pilarski, Robert ;
Berry, Michael ;
Buys, Saundra S. ;
Farmer, Meagan ;
Friedman, Susan ;
Garber, Judy E. ;
Kauff, Noah D. ;
Khan, Seema ;
Klein, Catherine ;
Kohlmann, Wendy ;
Kurian, Allison ;
Litton, Jennifer K. ;
Madlensky, Lisa ;
Merajver, Sofia D. ;
Offit, Kenneth ;
Pal, Tuya ;
Reiser, Gwen ;
Shannon, Kristen Mahoney ;
Swisher, Elizabeth ;
Vinayak, Shaveta ;
Voian, Nicoleta C. ;
Weitzel, Jeffrey N. ;
Wick, Myra J. ;
Wiesner, Georgia L. ;
Dwyer, Mary ;
Darlow, Susan .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2017, 15 (01) :9-19
[5]   Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2015 Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines [J].
Daly, Mary B. ;
Pilarski, Robert ;
Axilbund, Jennifer E. ;
Berry, Michael ;
Buys, Saundra S. ;
Crawford, Beth ;
Farmer, Meagan ;
Friedman, Susan ;
Garber, Judy E. ;
Khan, Seema ;
Klein, Catherine ;
Kohlmann, Wendy ;
Kurian, Allison ;
Litton, Jennifer K. ;
Madlensky, Lisa ;
Marcom, P. Kelly ;
Merajver, Sofia D. ;
Offit, Kenneth ;
Pal, Tuya ;
Rana, Huma ;
Reiser, Gwen ;
Robson, Mark E. ;
Shannon, Kristen Mahoney ;
Swisher, Elizabeth ;
Voian, Nicoleta C. ;
Weitzel, Jeffrey N. ;
Whelan, Alison ;
Wick, Myra J. ;
Wiesner, Georgia L. ;
Dwyer, Mary ;
Kumar, Rashmi ;
Darlow, Susan .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2016, 14 (02) :153-162
[6]  
Dillman D.A., 2009, Internet, Mail, and Mix-Mode Surveys: The Taylored Design Method
[7]   Physicians' Attitudes About Multiplex Tumor Genomic Testing [J].
Gray, Stacy W. ;
Hicks-Courant, Katherine ;
Cronin, Angel ;
Rollins, Barrett J. ;
Weeks, Jane C. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (13) :1317-+
[8]   Genetic Testing: What Problem Are We Trying to Solve? [J].
Hughes, Kevin S. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (34) :3789-+
[9]   Treatment Experiences of Latinas After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer [J].
Katz, Steven J. ;
Wallner, Lauren P. ;
Abrahamse, Paul H. ;
Janz, Nancy K. ;
Martinez, Kathryn A. ;
Shumway, Dean A. ;
Hamilton, Ann S. ;
Ward, Kevin C. ;
Resnicow, Kenneth A. ;
Hawley, Sarah T. .
CANCER, 2017, 123 (16) :3022-3030
[10]   Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer [J].
Kurian, Allison W. ;
Li, Yun ;
Hamilton, Ann S. ;
Ward, Kevin C. ;
Hawley, Sarah T. ;
Morrow, Monica ;
McLeod, M. Chandler ;
Jagsi, Reshma ;
Katz, Steven J. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (20) :2232-+