Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23748873›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2014

Perceived versus predicted risks of colorectal cancer and self-reported colonoscopies by members of mismatch repair gene mutation-carrying families who have declined genetic testing.

Louisa Flander, Andrew Speirs-Bridge, Alison Rutstein, Heather Niven, Aung Ko Win, Driss Ait Ouakrim, John L Hopper, Finlay Macrae, Louise Keogh, Clara Gaff and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Cohort Profile: The Colon Cancer Family Registry Cohort (CCFRC).International journal of epidemiology · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The Impact of Receiving Predictive Genetic Information about Lynch Syndrome on Individual Colonoscopy and Smoking Behaviors.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016
    Article
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Louisa FlanderCentre for Molecular, Environmental, Genetic & Analytic Epidemiology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia, l.flander@unimelb.edu.au.
Andrew Speirs-Bridge
Alison Rutstein
Heather Niven
Aung Ko Win
Driss Ait Ouakrim
John L Hopper
Finlay Macrae
Louise Keogh
Clara Gaff
Mark Jenkins
University of Melbourne · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

Colon Cancer Family Registry CohortUM1CA167551 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HAILE, ROBERT WILLIAM, JENKINS, MARK A · 2013 to 2017
$11.3M
AUSTRALASIAN COLORECTAL CANCER FAMILY REGISTRYU01CA097735 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE · PI HOPPER, JOHN L · 2002 to 2007
$6.9M
The Colon Cancer Family Registry: AustralasiaU24CA097735 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE · PI HOPPER, JOHN L · 2008 to 2011
$6.2M
Redox Regulation of Metastasis by Sod2K22CA095011 · NCI · ALBANY MEDICAL COLLEGE · PI MELENDEZ, JUAN ANDRES · 2002 to 2004
$446k
NCI NIH HHS CA-95-011NCI NIH HHS U01 CA097735NCI NIH HHS U24 CA097735NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA167551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People carrying germline mutations in mismatch repair genes are at high risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), yet about half of people from mutation-carrying families decline genetic counselling and/or testing to identify mutation status. We studied the association of quantitative measures of risk perception, risk prediction and self-reported screening colonoscopy in this elusive yet high-risk group. The sample of 26 participants (mean age 43.1 years, 14 women) in the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry were relatives of mutation carriers; had not been diagnosed with any cancer at the time of recruitment and had declined an invitation to attend genetic counselling and/or testing. A structured elicitation protocol captured perceived CRC risk over the next 10 years. Self-reported colonoscopy screening was elicited during a 45-minute semi-structured interview. Predicted 10-year CRC risk based on age, gender, known mutation status and family history was calculated using "MMRpro." Mean perceived 10-year risk of CRC was 31 % [95 % CI 21, 40], compared with mean predicted risk of 4 % [2, 7] (p < 0.001); this was independent of age and sex (p = 0.9). Among those reporting any medical advice and any screening colonoscopy (n = 18), those with higher risk perception had less frequent colonoscopy (Pearson's r = 0.49 [0.02, 0.79]). People who decline genetic testing for CRC susceptibility mutations perceive themselves to be at substantially higher risk than they really are. Those with high perceived risk do not undertake screening colonoscopy more often than those who perceive themselves to be at average risk.

Indexed as

Base Pair MismatchColonoscopyGenetic Carrier ScreeningAdultAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID23748873
PMCPMC3838501
OpenAlexW2162909316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.