Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31342359›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2019

Consensus Guidelines on Genetic` Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer from the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

Eric R Manahan, Henry M Kuerer, Molly Sebastian, Kevin S Hughes, Judy C Boughey, David M Euhus, Susan K Boolbol, Walton A Taylor

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 178 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

178 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The growing high-risk population.American journal of surgery · 2026
    Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Eric R ManahanDepartment of Surgery, Hamilton Medical Center, Dalton, GA, USA. ermanahan@sebreast.com.
Henry M KuererDepartment Breast Surgical Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Molly SebastianReinsch Pierce Family Center for Breast Health, Virginia Hospital Center, Arlington, VA, USA.
Kevin S HughesDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Judy C BougheyDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
David M EuhusDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Susan K BoolbolDepartment of Surgery, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA.
Walton A TaylorTexas Health Physicians Group, Dallas, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this consensus guideline is to outline recommendations for genetic testing that medical professionals can use to assess hereditary risk for breast cancer.

methodsLiterature review included large datasets, basic and clinical science publications, and recent updated national guidelines. Genetic testing to assess hereditary risk of cancer is a complex, broad, and dynamic area of medical research. The dominant focus of this guideline is limited in scope to breast cancer.

resultsThere is a lack of consensus among experts regarding which genes among many should be tested in different clinical scenarios. There is also variation in the degree of consensus regarding the understanding of risk and appropriate clinical management of mutations in many genes.

conclusionsGenetic testing should be made available to all patients with a personal history of breast cancer. Recent data are reviewed that support genetic testing being offered to each patient with breast cancer (newly diagnosed or with a personal history). If genetic testing is performed, such testing should include BRCA1/BRCA2 and PALB2, with other genes as appropriate for the clinical scenario and family history. For patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, identification of a mutation may impact local treatment recommendations. Patients who had genetic testing previously may benefit from updated testing. Genetic testing should be made available to patients without a history of breast cancer who meet National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Finally, variants of uncertain significance are not clinically actionable and these patients should be managed based on their individual risk factors.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseMutationBiomarkers, TumorBRCA1 ProteinBRCA2 ProteinBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic TestingHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentSurgeonsBiomarkers, TumorBRCA1 ProteinBRCA1 protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID31342359
PMCPMC6733830

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.