ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2017
Targeting breast cancer outcomes-what about the primary relatives?
Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUp to 65% of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients had not been screened correctly before diagnosis resulting in increased stage of cancer at presentation. This study assessed whether their primary relatives are, in turn, assessed appropriately.
methodsAn ethically approved prospective study involving 274 primary relatives of women diagnosed with breast cancer, between 2009-2012, at a symptomatic breast unit in Ireland. Telephone interview established: demographics, menstrual history, family history verification, breast screening history. Personal risk level was calculated and whether current screening met screening guidelines. Participants were enrolled into appropriate screening programs if currently not in one and results analyzed.
resultsTwo hundred and fifteen of the 280 (76.8%) newly diagnosed patients responded giving details of their 274 primary relatives; this made up the study cohort. Mean age 50 ± 10 (35-75). Thirty two percent were low risk, 64% moderate and 4% high. 190/274 (69%) were being screened appropriately. Seventy five relatives were then assessed with: mammography in 55, Mg and US in 16. Four underwent a biopsy and to date none had cancer. Surveillance was: annual screening in 48%; national screening program and General Practitioner (GP) in 33%; GP only in over 65s in 13%; 6% await further assessment at specialist genetics clinics where their surveillance will be decided.
conclusionsThis study has identified an opportunity to improve the delivery of appropriate screening to higher risk primary relatives of patients with breast cancer. This necessitates an integrated national approach involving providers of primary care, patients and screening breast programs.
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.