ArticleFamilial cancer2018
Risk management adherence following genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a Singaporean experience.
Article in Familial cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- A Scoping Review of Primary Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Strategies in East and Southeast Asia.Cancers · 2025Review
- The Tumour Microenvironment and Epigenetic Regulation inCancers · 2024Review
- Strategies to improve implementation of cascade testing in hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review.NPJ genomic medicine · 2024Article
- Efficacy of polygenic risk scores and digital technologies for INNOvative personalized cardiovascular disease PREVention in high-risk adults: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Understanding cancer predisposition in Singapore: What's next.Singapore medical journal · 2023Review
- Decision-making for Risk-reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in Southeast Asian BRCA Mutation Carriers With Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- An in-depth exploration of the post-test informational needs ofHereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Assessing adherence behavior among mutation carriers to cancer risk management guidelines is important for both service improvement and cost-effectiveness analyses, but such real-world data is often lacking. The present study aims to report adherence rates among mutation carriers in a recently established cancer genetics program in Singapore. We conducted a medical chart review of mutation carriers who had attended for genetic counseling and gathered data regarding risk management behavior, including cancer surveillance and/or risk-reducing surgery, and cancers subsequently detected. Of the 52 subjects included in the study, the majority were affected prior to genetic testing (78.8%) and had family history suggestive of a germline mutation (88.5%). The overall adherence rate was 96.2%, including 37 (74.0%) fully-adherent and 13 (26.0%) partially-adherent subjects, with five cancers subsequently detected. Among the 28 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, adherence to breast cancer risk management was also high (89.3%), although uptake of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was not as common (60%). Whilst overall adherence in this cohort was high, BRCA1/2 mutation carriers may require targeted interventions to improve ovarian cancer risk management uptake. Additionally, further education among health professionals and the wider community regarding cancer genetics is needed to ensure the early identification of mutation carriers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29368260What 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.