ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2025
Missing a chance to prevent: disparities in completion of genetic evaluation in high-risk patients with endometrial cancer.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploratory Analysis of Health Literacy and Genetic Testing Awareness, Uptake, and Desire for Genetic Risk Information: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Community Survey.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary goal of this study is to examine disparities in high-risk endometrial cancer (EC) patients in relation to rates of genetic referrals (GR), testing (GT), and counseling (GC).
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of patients with newly diagnosed EC between January 1, 2014 and September 1, 2020 at a single institution. Patients were defined as high-risk EC patients when they were 1) diagnosed at 50 years or younger, 2) had a positive family history for cancer or 3) had evidence of loss of mismatch repair protein expression on tumor immunohistochemistry. Rates of GR, GT and GC were analyzed based on race, ethnicity, primary language and insurance status.
resultsDuring the study period, 674 patients were diagnosed with EC and 249 (36.9%) were considered high-risk EC patients. Among high-risk patients, 128 (51.2%) were referred to GT and GC. Of those referred, 103 (80.5%) underwent GT and 85 (66.4%) completed GC. Out of all high-risk patients, 20 (18.4%) were positive for LS on GT and 29 (28.2%) had VUS results. In multivariate analysis, the odds of GT and GC referral were lower among patients who identified as Hispanic (OR=0.40; 95% CI=0.19-0.87; p=0.020). Patients who identified as black were less likely to receive GC when compared to patients of other races (p=0.030).
conclusionIt is our hope that through this data we will increase awareness around existing disparities in genetic evaluation for patients with EC and ultimately create strategies to improve equitable access to care for all patients.
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.