Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35781768›Full record

Trial reportBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2022

Randomised trial of population-based BRCA testing in Ashkenazi Jews: long-term secondary lifestyle behavioural outcomes.

Matthew Burnell, Faiza Gaba, Monika Sobocan, Rakshit Desai, Saskia Sanderson, Kelly Loggenberg, Sue Gessler, Lucy Side, Angela F Brady, Huw Dorkins and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Screening and prevention of ovarian cancer.The Medical journal of Australia · 2024
    Review
  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

19 authors at 15 institutions in 5 countries.

Matthew BurnellMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Faiza GabaWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4081-6883
Monika SobocanWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts CRUK Cancer Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Rakshit DesaiDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NH Trust, London, UK.
Saskia SandersonBehavioural Sciences Unit, Department Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
Kelly LoggenbergDepartment Clinical Genetics, North East Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK.
Sue GesslerDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.
Lucy SideUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Angela F BradyDepartment Clinical Genetics, North West Thames Regional Genetics Unit, Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK.
Huw DorkinsSt Peter's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Yvonne WallisWest Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory, Birmingham Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Chris JacobsDepatment Clinical Genetics, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Rosa LegoodDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Uziel BellerDepartment of Gynaecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.
Ian TomlinsonInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jane WardleBehavioural Sciences Unit, Department Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
Usha MenonDepartment of Gynaecological Oncology, Barts Health NH Trust, London, UK.
Ian JacobsUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Ranjit ManchandaMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3381-5057
Queen Mary University of London · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBPublic Health England · GBBirmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBLondon Women's Clinic · GBMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GBNorthwick Park Hospital · GBSaint Peter's University · USShaare Zedek Medical Center · ILUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/01NHS Innovation Accelerator PTNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University College London HospitalsThe Eve Appeal GTCV
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAshkenazi-Jewish (AJ) population-based BRCA testing is acceptable, cost-effective and amplifies primary prevention for breast & ovarian cancer. However, data describing lifestyle impact are lacking. We report long-term results of population-based BRCA testing on lifestyle behaviour and cancer risk perception.

designTwo-arm randomised controlled trials (ISRCTN73338115, GCaPPS): (a) population-screening (PS); (b) family history (FH)/clinical criteria testing.

settingNorth London AJ-population. POPULATION/SAMPLE: AJ women/men >18 years. EXCLUSIONS: prior BRCA testing or first-degree relatives of BRCA-carriers.

methodsParticipants were recruited through self-referral. All participants received informed pre-test genetic counselling. The intervention included genetic testing for three AJ BRCA-mutations: 185delAG(c.68_69delAG), 5382insC(c.5266dupC) and 6174delT(c.5946delT). This was undertaken for all participants in the PS arm and participants fulfilling FH/clinical criteria in the FH arm. Patients filled out customised/validated questionnaires at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups. Generalised linear-mixed models adjusted for covariates and appropriate contrast tests were used for between-group/within-group analysis of lifestyle and behavioural outcomes along with evaluating factors associated with these outcomes. Outcomes are adjusted for multiple testing (Bonferroni method), with P < 0.0039 considered significant. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifestyle/behavioural outcomes at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups.

results1034 participants were randomised to PS (n = 530) or FH (n = 504) arms. No significant difference was identified between PS- and FH-based BRCA testing approaches in terms of dietary fruit/vegetable/meat consumption, vitamin intake, alcohol quantity/ frequency, smoking behaviour (frequency/cessation), physical activity/exercise or routine breast mammogram screening behaviour, with outcomes not affected by BRCA test result. Cancer risk perception decreased with time following BRCA testing, with no difference between FH/PS approaches, and the perception of risk was lowest in BRCA-negative participants. Men consumed fewer fruits/vegetables/vitamins and more meat/alcohol than women (P < 0.001).

conclusionPopulation-based and FH-based AJ BRCA testing have similar long-term lifestyle impacts on smoking, alcohol, dietary fruit/vegetable/meat/vitamin, exercise, breast screening participation and reduced cancer risk perception.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsOvarian NeoplasmsAdultFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingHumansJewsLife StyleMaleVitaminsVitaminsAshkenazi JewsBRCA1/BRCA2cancer riskgenetic testinglifestylepopulation testing

Identifiers

PMID35781768
PMCPMC9796935
OpenAlexW4283800370

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.