ArticleThe oncologist2022
The Role of Race and Insurance Status in Access to Genetic Counseling and Testing Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in The oncologist, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chatbot Artificial Intelligence for Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Pooled it
- Randomized trial promoting cancer genetic risk assessment when genetic counseling cost removed: 1-year follow-up.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Trial
- The germline MLH1 c.2054 C>T mutation disrupts DNA mismatch repair and is detectable by digital PCR.Cancer letters · 2026Article
- Characterization of von Hippel Lindau gene variants in an African American cohort.HGG advances · 2026Article
- Impact of Affordable Care Act Provisions on the Racial Makeup of Patients Enrolled at a Deep South, High-Risk Breast Cancer Clinic.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- The ENGAGE study: evaluation of a conversational virtual agent that provides tailored pre-test genetic education to cancer patients.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Familial communication and cascade testing following elective genomic testing.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Article
- The Evolution of Genetic Testing from Focused Testing to Panel Testing and from Patient Focused to Population Testing: Are We There Yet?Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2024Review
- Disparities in Genetic Testing for Neurologic Disorders.Neurology · 2024Article
- Genetic Testing Enhances the Precision Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Racial and regional disparities in deaths in breast cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2023Article
- Ethical considerations of genetic and genomic testing in pediatric oncology: A narrative review.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe role of germline genetic testing in breast cancer patients is crucial, especially in the setting of the recent trials showing the benefit of PARP inhibitors. The goal of this study was to identify racial disparities in genetic counseling and testing in patients with high-risk breast cancer.
methodsPatients with 2 unique breast cancer diagnoses were examined to understand demographics, insurance coverage, characteristics of breast cancer, and whether they were recommended for and received genetic counseling and testing.
resultsA total of 69 patients with a dual diagnosis of breast cancer between the years 2000 and 2017 were identified (42% identified as White compared to 58% that identified as non-White). White patients were more likely to be recommended for genetic counseling (OR = 2.85; 95% CI, 1.07-7.93, P < .05), be referred for genetic counseling (OR = 3.17; 95% CI, 1.19-8.86, P < .05), receive counseling (OR = 3.82; 95% CI, 1.42-10.83, P < .01), and undergo genetic testing (OR = 2.88; 95% CI, 0.97-9.09, P = .056) compared to non-White patients. Patients with private insurance were significantly more likely to be recommended for genetic counseling (OR 5.63, P < .005), referred (OR 6.11, P < .005), receive counseling (OR 4.21, P < .05), and undergo testing (OR 4.10, P < .05). When controlled for insurance, there was no significant racial differences in the rates of GC recommendation, referral, counseling, or testing.
conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that disparities in genetic counseling and testing are largely driven by differences in health insurance.
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.