Genetic Counseling, Testing, and Family Communication Into Survivorship After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

IF 42.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Journal of Clinical Oncology Pub Date : 2024-09-10 Epub Date: 2024-07-15 DOI:10.1200/JCO.24.00122
Steven J Katz, Paul Abrahamse, Allison Furgal, Rachel Hodan, Rachel S Tocco, Kevin C Ward, Ann S Hamilton, Lauren P Wallner, Allison W Kurian
{"title":"Genetic Counseling, Testing, and Family Communication Into Survivorship After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.","authors":"Steven J Katz, Paul Abrahamse, Allison Furgal, Rachel Hodan, Rachel S Tocco, Kevin C Ward, Ann S Hamilton, Lauren P Wallner, Allison W Kurian","doi":"10.1200/JCO.24.00122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine receipt of genetic testing and communication with relatives about results into survivorship after diagnosis of breast cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women age 20-79 years diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer in 2014-2015 and reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County SEER registries were surveyed approximately 7 months and 6 years after diagnosis (n = 1,412). We asked about genetic counseling, testing, and communication with relatives about results. We categorized women into indications for testing on the basis of clinical guidelines at the time of diagnosis and at the time of the follow-up survey (FUPs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 47.4% had indications for genetic testing at any time: 28.0% at baseline and an additional 19.4% at the time of the FUPs (only); 71.9% (95% CI, 67.4 to 76.4) of those with a baseline indication reported genetic testing versus 53.3% (95% CI, 47.3 to 59.2) with an indication at FUPs only and 35.0% (95% CI, 31.6 to 38.4) with no indication (<i>P</i> < .001). There were no significant racial or ethnic differences in receipt of testing, controlling for age and clinical indications (<i>P</i> = .239); results for genetic counseling were similar. Only 3.4% of survivors had direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCt) for cancer. Testers who reported a pathogenic variant (n = 62) were much more likely to have talked to most or all their first-degree adult relatives about genetic testing than those with a variant of unknown significance (n = 49) or a negative finding (n = 419): 62.7% versus 38.8% and 38.0%, respectively (<i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Many women with indications for genetic counseling and testing into survivorship do not receive it. But those tested reach out to family members on the basis of the clinical relevance of their results. Very few patients obtained DTCt, which suggests that these tests do not substitute for clinical testing in breast cancer survivors.</p>","PeriodicalId":15384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":42.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11377164/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.00122","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To examine receipt of genetic testing and communication with relatives about results into survivorship after diagnosis of breast cancer.

Methods: Women age 20-79 years diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer in 2014-2015 and reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County SEER registries were surveyed approximately 7 months and 6 years after diagnosis (n = 1,412). We asked about genetic counseling, testing, and communication with relatives about results. We categorized women into indications for testing on the basis of clinical guidelines at the time of diagnosis and at the time of the follow-up survey (FUPs).

Results: A total of 47.4% had indications for genetic testing at any time: 28.0% at baseline and an additional 19.4% at the time of the FUPs (only); 71.9% (95% CI, 67.4 to 76.4) of those with a baseline indication reported genetic testing versus 53.3% (95% CI, 47.3 to 59.2) with an indication at FUPs only and 35.0% (95% CI, 31.6 to 38.4) with no indication (P < .001). There were no significant racial or ethnic differences in receipt of testing, controlling for age and clinical indications (P = .239); results for genetic counseling were similar. Only 3.4% of survivors had direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCt) for cancer. Testers who reported a pathogenic variant (n = 62) were much more likely to have talked to most or all their first-degree adult relatives about genetic testing than those with a variant of unknown significance (n = 49) or a negative finding (n = 419): 62.7% versus 38.8% and 38.0%, respectively (P < .001).

Conclusion: Many women with indications for genetic counseling and testing into survivorship do not receive it. But those tested reach out to family members on the basis of the clinical relevance of their results. Very few patients obtained DTCt, which suggests that these tests do not substitute for clinical testing in breast cancer survivors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
遗传咨询、检测和家庭沟通融入乳腺癌诊断后的幸存者生活。
目的:研究乳腺癌确诊后接受基因检测的情况以及与亲属就检测结果进行沟通的情况:我们对 2014-2015 年期间确诊为早期乳腺癌并向佐治亚州和洛杉矶县 SEER 登记处报告的 20-79 岁女性(n=1,412)在确诊后约 7 个月和 6 年进行了调查。我们询问了遗传咨询、检测以及与亲属沟通结果的情况。我们根据诊断时和随访调查时(FUPs)的临床指南将妇女分为不同的检测适应症:共有 47.4% 的人在任何时候都有基因检测指征:28.0% 的人在基线时有基因检测指征,另外 19.4% 的人在后续调查时(仅在后续调查时)有基因检测指征;在有基线指征的人中,71.9%(95% CI,67.4 至 76.4)的人报告了基因检测,而在后续调查时有指征的人中,53.3%(95% CI,47.3 至 59.2)的人报告了基因检测,35.0%(95% CI,31.6 至 38.4)的人没有指征(P < .001)。在控制年龄和临床指征的情况下,接受检测的种族或民族差异并不明显(P = .239);遗传咨询的结果与此类似。只有 3.4% 的幸存者接受了直接面向消费者的癌症基因检测(DTCt)。与意义不明的变异体(n = 49)或阴性结果(n = 419)的检测者相比,报告了致病变异体(n = 62)的检测者更有可能与其大部分或所有一级成年亲属谈论过基因检测:分别为 62.7% 对 38.8% 和 38.0% (P < .001):结论:许多有遗传咨询和检测指征的妇女在存活期内并未接受遗传咨询和检测。结论:许多有遗传咨询和检测指征的妇女并没有接受检测,但接受检测的妇女会根据检测结果的临床相关性联系其家人。只有极少数患者接受了 DTCt,这表明这些检测不能替代乳腺癌幸存者的临床检测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Journal of Clinical Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
41.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
8215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Oncology serves its readers as the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research. In print and in electronic format, JCO strives to publish the highest quality articles dedicated to clinical research. Original Reports remain the focus of JCO, but this scientific communication is enhanced by appropriately selected Editorials, Commentaries, Reviews, and other work that relate to the care of patients with cancer.
期刊最新文献
Nanoliposomal Irinotecan With Fluorouracil and Leucovorin or Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin in Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase II Study of the AIO Hepatobiliary-YMO Cancer Groups (NIFE-AIO-YMO HEP-0315). Scalp Cooling in Preventing Persistent Chemotherapy-Induced Alopecia: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Turning the Knobs on Screening Liquid Biopsies for High-Risk Populations: Potential for Dialing Down Invasive Procedures. Helicobacter pylori and Gastric Cancer Screening. Reply to S. Sorscher.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1