ArticleFamilial cancer2013
Can we test for hereditary cancer at 18 years when we start surveillance at 25? Patient reported outcomes.
Article in Familial cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Measures for Individuals Who Underwent Genetic Testing for Heritable Cancer.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- Family Communication, Risk Perception and Cancer Knowledge of Young Adults from BRCA1/2 Families: a Systematic Review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Pooled it
- Need for specially designed educational support groups: Young women's experiences of being identified with BRCA pathogenic variants.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- "It was an important part of my treatment": a qualitative study of Norwegian breast Cancer patients' experiences with mainstreamed genetic testing.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Should pretest genetic counselling be required for patients pursuing genomic sequencing? Results from a survey of participants in a large genomic implementation study.Journal of medical genetics · 2019Article
- Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2017Review
- High Satisfaction and Low Distress in Breast Cancer Patients One Year after BRCA-Mutation Testing without Prior Face-to-Face Genetic Counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- Experiences of Women Who Underwent Predictive BRCA 1/2 Mutation Testing Before the Age of 30.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- Impact of BRCA1/2 mutation on young women's 5-year parenthood rates: a prospective comparative study (GENEPSO-PS cohort).Familial cancer · 2015Article
- Monitoring style of coping with cancer related threats: a review of the literature.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA-testing for BRCA1/2 or Lynch syndrome is possible from the age of 18 years, although surveillance usually starts at 25. Some patients regret their decision of testing before age 25. This retrospective study evaluates whether the testing age should be above 25 years to prevent adverse effects such as regret or decisional conflict, by determining the percentage and characteristics of patients reporting these problems. 111 of 219 patients (51%) tested for BRCA1/2 mutations or Lynch syndrome between 18 and 25 years from July 1996 to February 2011, returned self-report surveys. Primary measures were regret, decisional conflict and family influence. Secondary measures included quality of life (QoL), coping style, impact of genetic testing, and risk perception. Median age was 27 [21-40] years, with 86% female. 73% was tested for BRCA1/2, 27% for Lynch syndrome. Only 3% reported regret, however 39% had moderate (32%) to severe (7%) decisional conflict. Regression analysis revealed that decisional conflict was associated with more monitoring/neutral coping style (p < 0.03) or paternal/no family mutation (p < 0.02); there were no differences in QoL, impact or risk perception. 42% were mutation carriers, showing equal decisional conflict to non-carriers. 68% would recommend testing <25 years; 77% desired surveillance <25 years if a mutation carrier. Almost no patient tested for hereditary cancer between 18 and 25 years regretted this decision. A third reported retrospective decisional conflict, especially those actively seeking information when faced with a threat and/or those with a paternal or unknown inheritance. These patients may benefit from decisional support and personalized information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23604858What 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.