ReviewJournal of geriatric oncology2020
Genetic cancer predisposition syndromes among older adults.
Review in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the hereditary genetic mutational landscape of breast and ovarian cancer in Estonia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Beyond sensitivity and specificity: Redefining the era connotation of "low-risk" in pancreatic cancer screening.World journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- The global cancer crisis: a review of growing burden, deepening inequality and initiatives for prevention and early detection.Ecancermedicalscience · 2026Review
- A retrospective single-center pilot study of the genetic background of the transplanted kidney.PloS one · 2025Article
- Genetic Predisposition to Sarcoma: What Should Clinicians Know?Current treatment options in oncology · 2024Review
- Next-Generation Sequencing Testing Can Save Generations of Lives.JCO precision oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Earlier age at onset is one characteristic of hereditary cancer syndromes, so most studies of genetic testing have focused on young patients with cancer. However, recent studies of multigene panel tests in unselected cancer populations have detected a considerable proportion of older patients with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer susceptibility genes. As the number of older patients with cancer continues to rise, clinicians should be aware of genetic/genomic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) criteria in both young and older adults. Identifying individuals with a germline PV in a cancer susceptibility gene may be important for precision therapy of current cancers and screening and prevention of new primary cancers, as well as cascade testing to identify high cancer risks for family members. Typically, hereditary predisposition germline genetic testing has been recommended for patients with early onset cancers and/or a family history of cancer. However, more recently international guidelines recommend testing for potential therapeutic intervention regardless of age for some tumors frequently seen in older patients, such as epithelial ovarian, pancreatic, and metastatic prostate and breast cancers. GCRA in older patients may present challenges including: clonal hematopoiesis (CH) confounding test interpretation, ethical aspects (autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence), patient health status, comorbidities, as well as lack of insurance coverage. These factors should be considered during genetic counseling and when considering cancer screening and risk reduction procedures. This manuscript reviews available data on common hereditary cancer syndromes in older patients and provides tools to help providers perform GCRA in this population.
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.