ArticleFamilial cancer2014
Cancer genetic testing panels for inherited cancer susceptibility: the clinical experience of a large adult genetics practice.
Article in Familial cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychosocial predictors of hereditary cancer genetic testing motivation in untested individuals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Screening for Mutations in Hereditary Cancer Susceptibility Genes in a Region with High Endogamy in Brazil.Global medical genetics · 2023Article
- Federated Analysis for Privacy-Preserving Data Sharing: A Technical and Legal Primer.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2023Review
- Eleven Years of Oncogenetic Consultations in a Swiss Center: Patient and Testing Characteristics.The application of clinical genetics · 2023Article
- Ovarian cancer risk assessment in the era of next-generation sequencing.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Review
- A Novel Germline c.1267T>AGenes · 2020Article
- Clinical Validity of Next-Generation Sequencing Multi-Gene Panel Testing for Detecting Pathogenic Variants in Patients With Hereditary Breast-Ovarian Cancer Syndrome.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- Patients' willingness to reconsider cancer genetic testing after initially declining: Mention it again.Journal of genetic counseling · 2020Article
- Germline susceptibility variants impact clinical outcome and therapeutic strategies for stage III colorectal cancer.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Uptake, Results, and Outcomes of Germline Multiple-Gene Sequencing After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.JAMA oncology · 2018Article
- Clinical genetic testing outcome with multi-gene panel in Asian patients with multiple primary cancers.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Horizon Scan Of Clinical Laboratories Offering Pharmacogenetic Testing.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2018Article
- Inherited Cancer in the Age of Next-Generation Sequencing.Biological research for nursing · 2018Review
- Cancer Genetic Counseling and Testing in an Era of Rapid Change.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Factors Associated with Interest in Gene-Panel Testing and Risk Communication Preferences in Women from BRCA1/2 Negative Families.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer predisposition in unsolved high-risk breast and ovarian cancer patients.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2017Article
- The Changing Landscape of Genetic Testing for Inherited Breast Cancer Predisposition.Current treatment options in oncology · 2017Review
- Multi-gene panel testing for hereditary cancer susceptibility in a rural Familial Cancer Program.Familial cancer · 2017Observational
- Evaluation of laboratory perspectives on hereditary cancer panels.Familial cancer · 2016Article
- Increased yield of actionable mutations using multi-gene panels to assess hereditary cancer susceptibility in an ethnically diverse clinical cohort.Cancer genetics · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Next-generation sequencing genetic testing panels for cancer susceptibility (cancer panels) have recently become clinically available. At present, clinical utility is unknown and there are no set criteria or guidelines established for whom to offer such testing. Although it may be a cost-effective method to test multiple cancer susceptibility genes concurrently, the rate of finding variants of unknown significance (VUS) may be high and testing may yield mutations in genes with no established management recommendations. We describe our Center's experience over a 14-month period (April 2012-June 2013) for patient interest and uptake in cancer panel testing and whether there were predictors of pursuing testing or identifying mutations. Using a clinical ranking system, patients' family histories were ranked from 0 to 3 (low likelihood to high likelihood for underlying genetic susceptibility). The clinical ranking system was assessed to determine its predictability of finding mutations. Of the 689 patients who met inclusion criteria, the option of pursuing a cancer panel was discussed with 357 patients; 63 (17.6 %) patients pursued testing. Those who pursued testing were more likely to be older, male, affected with cancer, affected with multiple primary cancers, and had a higher clinical rank than non-pursuers. There were no significant predictors of finding a mutation on panel testing. Of the 61 patients who have received results, there was a 6.6 % mutation rate and 19.7 % VUS rate. The yield of cancer panels in clinical practice is low and the strength of family history alone may not predict likelihood of finding a mutation.
Indexed as
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.