Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29528794›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2018

Gaps in Receipt of Clinically Indicated Genetic Counseling After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

Steven J Katz, Kevin C Ward, Ann S Hamilton, M Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P Wallner, Monica Morrow, Reshma Jagsi, Sarah T Hawley, Allison W Kurian

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Genetic Counseling, Testing, and Family Communication Into Survivorship After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Steven J KatzSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Kevin C WardSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Ann S HamiltonSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
M Chandler McleodSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Lauren P WallnerSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Monica MorrowSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Reshma JagsiSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Sarah T HawleySteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Allison W KurianSteven J. Katz, M. Chandler Mcleod, Lauren P. Wallner, Reshma Jagsi, and Sarah T. Hawley, University of Michigan; Sarah T. Hawley, Ann Arbor VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI; Kevin C. Ward, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Ann S. Hamilton, University of Southern California, Los Angeles; Allison W. Kurian, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Monica Morrow, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Invitae (United States) · USMyriad (Germany) · DEUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USGlaxoSmithKline (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

XenograftP30CA046592 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Alexey I Nesvizhskii · 1988 to 2026
$178.2M
CALIFORNIA COORDINATED CANCER PREVENTION & CONTROL PROGRAMU58DP003862 · DP · CALIFORNIA STATE DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI SNIPES, KURT P · 2012 to 2014
$31.5M
GEORGIA COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CONTROL PROGRAMU58DP003875 · DP · GEORGIA DIVISION OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI O'CONNOR, JEAN CATHERINE · 2012 to 2014
$15.9M
The Challenge of Individualizing Treatments for Patients with Breast CancerP01CA163233 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HOFER, TIMOTHY P. · 2012 to 2016
$13.4M
CCR NIH HHS HHSN261201300015CNCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP003862NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP003875NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000034CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000035CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000035INCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000140CNCI NIH HHS P01 CA163233NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046592
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose Little is known about the extent to which genetic counseling is integrated into community practices for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer. We examined the receipt of clinically indicated genetic counseling in these patients. Patients and Methods We surveyed 5,080 patients between the ages of 20 and 79 years, diagnosed from July 2013 to August 2015 with early-stage breast cancer and reported to the SEER registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were linked to SEER clinical data and genetic test results. The study sample (N = 1,711) comprised patients with indications for formal genetic risk evaluation. Results Overall, 47.4% did not get tested, 40.7% tested negative, 7.4% had a variant of uncertain significance only, and 4.5% had a pathogenic mutation. Three quarters (74.6%) received some form of genetic counseling (43.5%, formal counseling and 31.1%, physician-directed discussion). Virtually all tested patients (96.1%) reported some form of genetic discussion (62.2%, formal counseling and 33.9%, physician-directed discussion). However, only one half (50.6%) of those not tested received any discussion about genetics. Younger women were more likely to report some type of counseling, controlling for other factors: odds ratio, 4.5 (95% CI, 2.6 to 8.0); 1.9 (95% CI, 1.1 to 3.3); and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.0 to 2.3) for women younger than 50 years of age, 50 to 59 years of age, and 60 to 69 years of age versus those 70 years of age and older. Patients' assessments of the amount of information they received about whether to get tested were similarly high whether they were counseled by a genetics expert or by a physician only (80.8% v 79.4% stated information was just right, P = .59). Conclusion Less than one half (43.5%) of patients with clinical indications received formal genetic counseling. There is a large gap between mandates for timely pretest formal genetic counseling in higher-risk patients and the reality of practice today.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGeorgiaHumansLos AngelesMiddle AgedSEER ProgramYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29528794
PMCPMC5908222
OpenAlexW2790993647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.