Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28717658›Full record

ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2017

Targeting breast cancer outcomes-what about the primary relatives?

Alison Johnston, Michael Sugrue

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 92% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alison JohnstonBreast Centre North WestLetterkenny University HospitalLetterkennyIreland.ORCID 0000-0001-8219-853X
Michael SugrueBreast Centre North WestLetterkenny University HospitalLetterkennyIreland.
Letterkenny University Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Breast cancerbreast cancer detectionbreast outcomesbreast screeningprimary relatives

Identifiers

PMID28717658
PMCPMC5511799
OpenAlexW2620822404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.