Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39226054›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Universal Genetic Testing for Newly Diagnosed Invasive Breast Cancer.

Zoulikha Rezoug, Stephanie P Totten, David Szlachtycz, Adrienne Atayan, Kristen Mohler, Sophie Albert, Leila Feng, Brianna Lemieux Anglin, Zhen Shen, Daniel Jimenez and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Postpartum breast cancer: evidence for a distinct phenotype.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

23 authors.

Zoulikha RezougCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Stephanie P TottenDepartment of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
David SzlachtyczCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Adrienne AtayanCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Kristen MohlerCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Sophie AlbertCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Leila FengCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Brianna Lemieux AnglinCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Zhen ShenCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Daniel JimenezCancer Research Program, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Nancy HamelCancer Research Program, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Nicholas MetiGerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Khashayar EsfahaniGerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Jean-François BoileauCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Ipshita PrakashCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Mark BasikCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Sarkis MeterissianCancer Research Program, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Francine TremblayDepartment of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
David FleiszerDepartment of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Dawn AndersonDepartment of Oncology, St Mary's Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
George ChongDepartment of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Stephanie M WongCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
William D FoulkesCancer Axis, Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Between 5% and 10% of breast cancer cases are associated with an inherited germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (GPV) in a breast cancer susceptibility gene (BCSG), which could alter local and systemic therapy recommendations. Traditional genetic testing criteria misses a proportion of these cases. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence and clinicopathological associations of GPVs in 2 groups of BCSGs among an ethnically diverse cohort of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study, conducted at 3 Montreal hospitals between September 2019 and April 2022, offered universal genetic counseling and testing to all women with a first diagnosis of invasive breast cancer. Women were offered an obligatory primary panel of BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 (B1B2P2) and an optional secondary panel of 14 additional BCSGs. Eligible participants were women 18 years of age or older who received a diagnosis of a first primary invasive breast cancer not more than 6 months before the time of referral to the study. Data were analyzed from November 2023 to June 2024. Results: Of 1017 referred patients, 805 were eligible and offered genetic counseling and testing, and 729 of those 805 (90.6%) consented to be tested. The median age at breast cancer diagnosis was 53 years (range, 23-91 years), and 65.4% were White and of European ancestry. Fifty-four GPVs were identified in 53 patients (7.3%), including 39 patients (5.3%) with B1B2P2 and 15 patients (2.1%) with 6 of the 14 secondary panel BCSGs (ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CHEK2, RAD51D, and STK11). On multivariable analysis, clinical factors independently associated with B1B2P2-positive status included being younger than 40 years of age at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 6.83; 95% CI, 2.22-20.90), triple-negative breast cancer (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 1.20-8.43), high grade disease (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.05-2.70), and family history of ovarian cancer (OR, 9.75; 95% CI, 2.65-35.85). Of 39 B1B2P2-positive patients, 13 (33.3%) were eligible for poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional universal genetic testing study of women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer, the prevalence of GPVs was 7.3%, with 5.3% of patients testing positive for B1B2P2. Among B1B2P2-women women, one-third were eligible for PARP inhibitors.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingAdultAgedBRCA1 ProteinBRCA2 ProteinCross-Sectional StudiesFanconi Anemia Complementation Group N ProteinFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansMiddle AgedBRCA1 ProteinBRCA1 protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, humanFanconi Anemia Complementation Group N ProteinPALB2 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID39226054
PMCPMC11372499

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.