ArticleJournal of community genetics2011
Genetic testing for familial/hereditary breast cancer-comparison of guidelines and recommendations from the UK, France, the Netherlands and Germany.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Breast Cancer Statistics in the European Union: Incidence and Survival across European Countries.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Pooled it
- Effectiveness of oncogenetics training on general practitioners' consultation skills: a randomized controlled trial.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2014Trial
- Optimizing Reporting and Outreach for Surveillance and Risk-Reducing Surgeries for Cancer Genetic Predisposition: Findings of a Workshop Organized by the International Cascade Consortium.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Identification of a novel pathogenic variant inJournal of genomics · 2021Article
- Pathway Analysis of Selected Circulating miRNAs in Plasma of Breast Cancer Patients: A Preliminary Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Observational
- Familial breast cancer and DNA repair genes: Insights into known and novel susceptibility genes from the GENESIS study, and implications for multigene panel testing.International journal of cancer · 2019Article
- Germline Missense Variants inCancers · 2019Review
- Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants in a large, unselected breast cancer cohort.International journal of cancer · 2019Article
- Patient-Centered Care in Breast Cancer Genetic Clinics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Delivering widespread BRCA testing and PARP inhibition to patients with ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2017Review
- Efficacy versus effectiveness of clinical genetic testing criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 hereditary mutations in incident breast cancer.Familial cancer · 2017Article
- Identification of large genomic rearrangement of BRCA1/2 in high risk patients in Korea.BMC medical genetics · 2017Article
- Emotional impact on the results of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test: an observational retrospective study.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2017Article
- Article
- Multiplex Gene Expression Profiling of 16 Target Genes in Neoplastic and Non-Neoplastic Canine Mammary Tissues Using Branched-DNA Assay.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Article
- Finding all BRCA pathogenic mutation carriers: best practice models.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Review
- BRCA to the future: towards best testing practice in the era of personalised healthcare.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, the national guidelines and recommendations for genetic testing for familial/hereditary breast cancer from the UK, France, the Netherlands and Germany were evaluated as to the inclusion criteria for genetic testing. In all four countries, access to genetic testing relies basically on the family history of breast and ovarian cancer. Similarities are obvious for most selection criteria. All four guidelines recommend embedding genetic testing within a framework of genetic counselling, and all agree to perform genetic testing first in an affected person. However, there are differences regarding the thresholds based on certain familial constellations, detailed description of selection criteria, the degree of relatedness between affected individuals and the counsellee, the age of diagnosis, the individual history of early onset breast cancer, bilateral breast cancer, the tumour morphology or the access to intensified surveillance. These differences and open questions not covered by the guidelines, e.g. on how to deal with phenocopies, unclassified variants, genetic variants in newly identified breast cancer susceptibility genes or with family constellations not fitting the criteria, are discussed. New evidence is usually slowly integrated into the guidelines. An exchange process towards the harmonization of the guidelines will ensure high quality health care across Europe.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.