Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35702497›Full record

ArticleBreast care (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Recommendation and Acceptance of Counselling for Familial Cancer Risk in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Cases.

Karin Kast, Julia Häfner, Evelin Schröck, Arne Jahn, Carmen Werner, Cornelia Meisel, Pauline Wimberger

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast care (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 5 institutions in 1 country.

Karin KastCenter of Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Center of Integrated Oncology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Julia HäfnerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Evelin SchröckNational Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Arne JahnNational Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Carmen WernerRegional Clinical Cancer Registry, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Cornelia MeiselDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Pauline WimbergerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
National Center for Tumor Diseases · DETU Dresden · DEHeidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In clinical routine, not every patient who is offered genetic counselling and diagnostics in order to investigate a familial cancer risk predisposition opts for it. Little is known about acceptance of counselling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in Germany. Methods: All primary breast cancer cases and patients with DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) treated at the University Hospital of Dresden between 2016 and 2019 were included. The number of tumor board recommendations for genetic counselling on the basis of the GC-HBOC risk criteria was recorded. Acceptance was analyzed by number of cases with counselling in the GC-HBOC-Center Dresden. Results: Of 996 primary breast cancer and DCIS cases, 262 (26.3%) were eligible for genetic counselling. Recommendation for genetic counselling was accepted by 64.1% (168/262). Of these 90.5% (152/168) opted for molecular genetic analysis. The acceptance rate for counselling increased between 2016 and 2019 from 58.3 to 72.6%. Altogether, 20.4% (31/152) patients were found to carry a pathogenic variant in the breast cancer genes Conclusion: Acceptance of recommendation is increasing as clinical consequences augment. Optimization in providing information about hereditary cancer risk and in accessibility of counselling and testing is required to further improve acceptance of recommendation.

Indexed as

AcceptanceBreast cancerCounsellingGeneticRecommendation

Identifiers

PMID35702497
PMCPMC9149417
OpenAlexW3173783488

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.