Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22838957›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2012

How should we discuss genetic testing with women newly diagnosed with breast cancer? Design and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of two models of delivering education about treatment-focused genetic testing to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer.

Kaaren J Watts, Bettina Meiser, Gillian Mitchell, Judy Kirk, Christobel Saunders, Michelle Peate, Jessica Duffy, Patrick J Kelly, Margaret Gleeson, Kristine Barlow-Stewart and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Kaaren J WattsDepartment of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, High Street, Randwick, NSW, Australia. k.watts@unsw.edu.au
Bettina Meiser
Gillian Mitchell
Judy Kirk
Christobel Saunders
Michelle Peate
Jessica Duffy
Patrick J Kelly
Margaret Gleeson
Kristine Barlow-Stewart
Belinda Rahman
Michael Friedlander
Kathy Tucker
TFGT Collaborative Group
UNSW Sydney · AUThe University of Sydney · AUPrince of Wales Hospital · AUHunter Genetics · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUThe University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGermline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing offered shortly after a breast cancer diagnosis to inform women's treatment choices - treatment-focused genetic testing 'TFGT' - has entered clinical practice in specialist centers and is likely to be soon commonplace in acute breast cancer management, especially for younger women. Yet the optimal way to deliver information about TFGT to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer is not known, particularly for those who were not suspected of having a hereditary breast cancer syndrome prior to their cancer diagnosis. Also, little is known about the behavioral and psychosocial impact or cost effectiveness of educating patients about TFGT. This trial aims to examine the impact and efficiency of two models of educating younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about genetic testing in order to provide evidence for a safe and effective future clinical pathway for this service. DESIGN/

methodsIn this non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, 140 women newly diagnosed with breast cancer (aged less than 50 years) are being recruited from nine cancer centers in Australia. Eligible women with either a significant family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer or with other high risk features suggestive of a mutation detection rate of > 10% are invited by their surgeon prior to mastectomy or radiotherapy. After completing the first questionnaire, participants are randomized to receive either: (a) an educational pamphlet about genetic testing (intervention) or (b) a genetic counseling appointment at a family cancer center (standard care). Each participant is offered genetic testing for germline BRCA mutations. Decision-related and psychosocial outcomes are assessed over 12 months and include decisional conflict (primary outcome);uptake of bilateral mastectomy and/or risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy; cancer-specific- and general distress; family involvement in decision making; and decision regret. A process-oriented retrospective online survey will examine health professionals' attitudes toward TFGT; a health economic analysis will determine the cost effectiveness of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide crucial information about the impact, efficiency and cost effectiveness of an educational pamphlet designed to inform younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about genetic testing. Issues regarding implementation of the trial are discussed.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingGenetic TestingAge FactorsBreast NeoplasmsClinical ProtocolsFemaleGenes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2HumansMutation

Identifiers

PMID22838957
PMCPMC3472271
OpenAlexW2108390111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.