ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2015
Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer: Panel or Targeted Testing? Experience from a Clinical Cancer Genetics Practice.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Detection rates of multigene panel and exome testing in patients with previous negative BRCA1/2 results.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- Occurrence of variants of unknown clinical significance in genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome and Lynch syndrome: a literature review and analytical observational retrospective cohort study.BMC medical genomics · 2023Review
- Discovery of breast cancer risk genes and establishment of a prediction model based on estrogen metabolism regulation.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Mutation Rates in Cancer Susceptibility Genes in Patients With Breast Cancer With Multiple Primary Cancers.JCO precision oncology · 2020Article
- Multi gene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer - is it ready to be used?Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2019Review
- Germline mutation landscape of Chinese patients with familial breast/ovarian cancer in a panel of 22 susceptibility genes.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
- Observational
- Patient-Centered Care in Breast Cancer Genetic Clinics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Use of the BOADICEA Web Application in clinical practice: appraisals by clinicians from various countries.Familial cancer · 2018Article
- The Clinical Utility of Next Generation Sequencing Results in a Community-Based Hereditary Cancer Risk Program.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Genomic Disparities in Breast Cancer Among Latinas.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Approaches to hereditary breast cancer testing are shifting as multi-gene panels become more widely available. This paper describes our center's experience and outcomes of a 6-gene panel test as a first-tier approach in patients who were candidates for BRCA testing. Between July and December 2013, a 6-gene panel test was ordered for patients meeting criteria for BRCA testing. A retrospective review detailed the mutation and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) rates for the genes analyzed. The mutation rate was 5.2 % (n = 7) and the VUS rate was 6.7 % (n = 9). A subsequent review determined the number of BRCA-negative patients who would have been offered additional single gene testing had BRCA, only, been their first-tier test. Applying consensus criteria revealed 7.1 % (n = 9) cases that met criteria for additional testing. Pedigree analysis by a certified genetic counselor revealed 26.8 % (n = 34) cases that would have been offered additional testing based on personal and/or family history. Our results suggest that this panel may be warranted as a first-tier test for a small subset of patients, but likely represents over testing for the majority of patients who are candidates for BRCA testing. The genes selected for panels, the extra costs per patient and the chance of VUS must be considered before we uniformly switch from BRCA to full panel testing on all patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25475920What 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.