ArticleJAMA network open2019
Evaluation of Cancer-Based Criteria for Use in Mainstream BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genetic Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer.
Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
76 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Measures for Individuals Who Underwent Genetic Testing for Heritable Cancer.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- The Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Medicine in Cancer Control: A Systematic Literature Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- EMQN best practice guidelines for genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Guideline
- A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Pooled it
- Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- DCE-MRI and Mammography integrated radiomic analysis in triple negative ductal invasive breast cancer patients. Comparison between BRCA and not BRCA mutated patients: preliminary results.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Impact of mainstream genetic testing for breast cancer patients: five-year data from the Parkville Familial Cancer Centre.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- Is Genetic Testing of HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Implemented into Clinical Practice? A Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Breast cancer specialists' experiences and attitudes towards mainstream genetic testing for patients with breast cancer.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Review
- Development and Real-World Evaluation of a Statewide Mainstream Model of Germline Genetic Testing for BRCA1/2 and Mismatch Repair Gene Variants (Lynch Syndrome).Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Cascade counselling and testing. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators for medical oncologists in the further implementation of mainstream genetic testing in breast cancer care in the Netherlands.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- Are Broadened Guidelines Improving our Detection of Pathologic Genetic Mutations in Breast Cancer Patients? A 5-Year Comparative Analysis of American Society of Breast Surgeons and National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Experience of urologists, oncologists and nurse practitioners with mainstream genetic testing in metastatic prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Article
- Predicting the likelihood of carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants in high-risk Pakistani breast cancer patients.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Timely germline BRCA testing after invasive breast cancer promotes contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy and improves survival: an observational retrospective study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Observational
- Canadian Recommendations for Germline Genetic Testing of Patients with Breast Cancer: A Call to Action.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Chemotherapy receipt in affected BRCA1/2 and PALB2 carriers with operable breast cancer: the impact of early detection and pre-diagnostic awareness on clinical outcomes and treatment.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Mainstream Germline Genetic Testing with Expanded Eligibility for Early Breast Cancer Patients in a Large Integrated Health System.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Increasing BRCA1 and BRCA2 (collectively termed herein as BRCA) gene testing is required to improve cancer management and prevent BRCA-related cancers. Objective: To evaluate mainstream genetic testing using cancer-based criteria in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: A quality improvement study and cost-effectiveness analysis of different BRCA testing selection criteria and access procedures to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, and mutation detection performance was conducted at the Royal Marsden National Health Service Foundation Trust as part of the Mainstreaming Cancer Genetics (MCG) Programme. Participants included 1184 patients with cancer who were undergoing genetic testing between September 1, 2013, and February 28, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mutation rates, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were the primary outcomes. Results: Of the 1184 patients (1158 women [97.8%]) meeting simple cancer-based criteria, 117 had a BRCA mutation (9.9%). The mutation rate was similar in retrospective United Kingdom (10.2% [235 of 2294]) and prospective Malaysian (9.7% [103 of 1061]) breast cancer studies. If traditional family history criteria had been used, more than 50% of the mutation-positive individuals would have been missed. Of the 117 mutation-positive individuals, 115 people (98.3%) attended their genetics appointment and cascade to relatives is underway in all appropriate families (85 of 85). Combining with the equivalent ovarian cancer study provides 5 simple cancer-based criteria for BRCA testing with a 10% mutation rate: (1) ovarian cancer; (2) breast cancer diagnosed when patients are 45 years or younger; (3) 2 primary breast cancers, both diagnosed when patients are 60 years or younger; (4) triple-negative breast cancer; and (5) male breast cancer. A sixth criterion-breast cancer plus a parent, sibling, or child with any of the other criteria-can be added to address family history. Criteria 1 through 5 are considered the MCG criteria, and criteria 1 through 6 are considered the MCGplus criteria. Testing using MCG or MCGplus criteria is cost-effective with cost-effectiveness ratios of $1330 per discounted QALYs and $1225 per discounted QALYs, respectively, and appears to lead to cancer and mortality reductions (MCG: 804 cancers, 161 deaths; MCGplus: 1020 cancers, 204 deaths per year over 50 years). Use of MCG or MCGplus criteria might allow detection of all BRCA mutations in patients with breast cancer in the United Kingdom through testing one-third of patients. Feedback questionnaires from 259 patients and 23 cancer team members (12 oncologists, 8 surgeons, and 3 nurse specialists) showed acceptability of the process with 100% of patients pleased they had genetic testing and 100% of cancer team members confident to approve patients for genetic testing. Use of MCGplus criteria also appeared to be time and resource efficient, requiring 95% fewer genetic consultations than the traditional process. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that mainstream testing using simple, cancer-based criteria might be able to efficiently deliver consistent, cost-effective, patient-centered BRCA testing.
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.