Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34656160›Full record

ArticleHereditary cancer in clinical practice2021

"Left in limbo": Exploring how patients with colorectal cancer interpret and respond to a suspected Lynch syndrome diagnosis.

Nicole den Elzen, Sharelle L Joseland, Sibel Saya, Sowmya Jonnagadla, Joanne Isbister, Ingrid Winship, Daniel D Buchanan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hereditary cancer in clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicole den ElzenColorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, 305 Grattan Street, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0223-4954
Sharelle L JoselandColorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, 305 Grattan Street, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3481-6801
Sibel SayaThe University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4796-6852
Sowmya JonnagadlaColorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, 305 Grattan Street, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5789-5082
Joanne IsbisterGenomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Ingrid WinshipGenomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8535-6003
Daniel D BuchananColorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, 305 Grattan Street, Parkville, Victoria, 3010, Australia. daniel.buchanan@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2225-6675
The University of Melbourne · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT1125268National Health and Medical Research Council GNT1125269National Health and Medical Research Council GNT1194896University of Melbourne Research at Melbourne Accelerator Program (R@MAP)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA diagnosis of suspected Lynch syndrome (SLS) is given when a tumour displays characteristics consistent with Lynch syndrome (LS), but no germline pathogenic variant is identified. This inconclusive diagnosis results in uncertainty around appropriate cancer risk management. This qualitative study explored how patients with CRC interpret and respond to an SLS diagnosis.

methodsSemi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 15 patients with CRC who received an SLS diagnosis, recruited from cancer genetics services across Australia. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Participant responses were compared with appointment summary letters from cancer genetics services.

resultsParticipants' interpretations of genetic test results were found to vary widely. While this variation often aligned with variation in interpretations by cancer genetics services, participants also had difficulties with the complexity and recall of genetic test results. Participants had a range of psychological responses to the uncertainty that their results presented, from relief to disappointment and doubt. Cancer risk perceptions also varied widely, with participants' interpretations of their genetic test results just one of several influencing factors. Despite this variability, almost all participants adhered to cancer risk management advice, although different participants received different advice. All participants also communicated any cancer risk management advice to first-degree relatives, motivated by protecting them, but information communicated was not always consistent with advice received.

conclusionsOur study findings highlight the variability in patients' interpretations of their diagnosis, cancer risk management and family communication when a diagnosis of SLS is received, and provide novel insights into how healthcare professionals can better support patients with SLS.

Indexed as

Cancer risk managementColorectal cancer (CRC)DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiencyHereditary cancerInconclusive diagnosisSuspected Lynch syndrome (SLS)

Identifiers

PMID34656160
PMCPMC8520179
OpenAlexW3205675147

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.