Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 27(7): 2248-2254, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31974710

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) developed clinical practice guidelines for germline pathogenic variants in highly penetrant genes, such as TP53 and PTEN, and in moderately penetrant genes, such as CHEK2, ATM and PALB2. Whether the practice of radiographic surveillance of patients with pathogenic variants in genes other than BRCA1/2 complies with current NCCN guidelines remains unclear. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients identified with pathogenic variants in genes other than BRCA1/2 from 2007 through 2017 to determine if radiographic surveillance was in accordance with NCCN guidelines for mammography and consideration of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Exclusions included variants of unknown significance, pathogenic variants not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, and previous breast cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: After exclusions, 35 patients with pathogenic variants in ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, PTEN, and STK11 genes were reviewed to assess whether radiographic surveillance was in accordance with NCCN guidelines. Guidelines for those with variants in ATM, CHEK2 and NBN includes annual mammography with tomosynthesis and consideration of breast MRI at age 40, variants in CDH1 and PALB2 at age 30, variants in PTEN at age 30-35 or 5-10 years before the earliest family breast cancer, and variants in STK11 at age 25. Of these 35 patients, 11 (31%) received mammography only; 11 (31%) received mammography and MRI, and 13 (37%) received no radiographic surveillance. Two of the 35 (6%) patients who received radiographic surveillance were diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Thirty-one percent of patients with pathogenic variants in genes other than BRCA1/2 received both mammography and MRI. Thirty-seven percent of patients with these highly penetrant and moderately penetrant genes received no radiographic follow-up, clearly demonstrating an opportunity for improvement.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Checkpoint Kinase 2/genetics , Humans , Retrospective Studies
2.
Am Surg ; 84(1): 154-160, 2018 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29428045

ABSTRACT

Genetic testing is important for comprehensive cancer care. Commercial analysis of the BRCA1/2 genes has been available since 1996, and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is well established. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines identify individuals for whom BRCA1/2 analysis is appropriate and define management recommendations for mutation carriers. Despite recommendations, not all who meet NCCN criteria undergo genetic testing. We assess the frequency that individuals meeting NCCN criteria decline BRCA1/2 analysis, as well as factors that affect the decision-making process. A retrospective chart review was performed from September 2013 through August 2014 of individuals who received genetic counseling at the Levine Cancer Institute. A total of 1082 individuals identified through the retrospective chart review met NCCN criteria for BRCA1/2 analysis. Of these, 267 (24.7%) did not pursue genetic testing. Of the Nontested cohort, 59 (22.1%) were disinterested in testing and 108 (40.4%) were advised to gather additional genetic or medical information about their relatives before testing. The remaining 100 (37.5%) individuals were insured and desired to undergo genetic testing but were prohibited by the expense. Eighty five of these 100 patients were responsible for the total cost of the test, whereas the remaining 15 faced a prohibitive copay expense. Financial concerns are a major deterrent to the pursuit of BRCA1/2 analysis among those who meet NCNN criteria, especially in patients diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer. These findings highlight the need to address financial concerns for genetic testing in this high-risk population.


Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Decision Making , Genetic Testing , Patient Compliance , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , DNA Mutational Analysis , Female , Genetic Counseling , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pedigree , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...