Ethics and Economics of Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer

1995 ◽  
pp. 55-65
Author(s):  
Robert A. Hiatt
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Ethics And Economics

scholarly journals Extended gene panel testing in lobular breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elke M. van Veen ◽  
D. Gareth Evans ◽  
Elaine F. Harkness ◽  
Helen J. Byers ◽  
Jamie M. Ellingford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Gene Panel ◽  
Lobular Breast Cancer ◽  
Germline Variants ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Gene Panel Testing ◽  
Increased Risk

AbstractPurpose: Lobular breast cancer (LBC) accounts for ~ 15% of breast cancer. Here, we studied the frequency of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in an extended panel of genes in women affected with LBC. Methods: 302 women with LBC and 1567 without breast cancer were tested for BRCA1/2 PGVs. A subset of 134 LBC affected women who tested negative for BRCA1/2 PGVs underwent extended screening, including: ATM, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, PTEN, RAD50, RAD51D, and TP53.Results: 35 PGVs were identified in the group with LBC, of which 22 were in BRCA1/2. Ten actionable PGVs were identified in additional genes (ATM(4), CDH1(1), CHEK2(1), PALB2(2) and TP53(2)). Overall, PGVs in three genes conferred a significant increased risk for LBC. Odds ratios (ORs) were: BRCA1: OR = 13.17 (95%CI 2.83–66.38; P = 0.0017), BRCA2: OR = 10.33 (95%CI 4.58–23.95; P < 0.0001); and ATM: OR = 8.01 (95%CI 2.52–29.92; P = 0.0053). We did not detect an increased risk of LBC for PALB2, CDH1 or CHEK2. Conclusion: The overall PGV detection rate was 11.59%, with similar rates of BRCA1/2 (7.28%) PGVs as for other actionable PGVs (7.46%), indicating a benefit for extended panel genetic testing in LBC. We also report a previously unrecognised association of pathogenic variants in ATM with LBC.

scholarly journals Assessment of genetic referrals and outcomes for women with triple negative breast cancer in regional cancer centres in Australia

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie G. Hallenstein ◽  
Carol Sorensen ◽  
Lorraine Hodgson ◽  
Shelly Wen ◽  
Justin Westhuyzen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Cancer Genetics ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Pathogenic Variants ◽  
Genetics Services ◽  
Age Of Diagnosis ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Guidelines for referral to cancer genetics service for women diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer have changed over time. This study was conducted to assess the changing referral patterns and outcomes for women diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer across three regional cancer centres during the years 2014–2018. Methods Following ethical approval, a retrospective electronic medical record review was performed to identify those women diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer, and whether they were referred to a genetics service and if so, the outcome of that genetics assessment and/or genetic testing. Results There were 2441 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer seen at our cancer services during the years 2014–2018, of whom 237 women were diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer. Based on age of diagnosis criteria alone, 13% (31/237) of our cohort fulfilled criteria for genetic testing, with 81% (25/31) being referred to a cancer genetics service. Of this group 68% (21/31) were referred to genetics services within our regions and went on to have genetic testing with 10 pathogenic variants identified; 5x BRCA1, 4x BRCA2 and × 1 ATM:c.7271 T > G. Conclusions Referral pathways for women diagnosed with TNBC to cancer genetics services are performing well across our cancer centres. We identified a group of women who did not meet eligibility criteria for referral at their time of diagnosis, but would now be eligible, as guidelines have changed. The use of cross-discipline retrospective data reviews is a useful tool to identify patients who could benefit from being re-contacted over time for an updated cancer genetics assessment.

scholarly journals Personalized Decision Making on Genomic Testing in Early Breast Cancer: Expanding the MINDACT Trial with Decision-Analytic Modeling

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2199117
Author(s):  
Ewout W. Steyerberg ◽  
Liesbeth C. de Wreede ◽  
David van Klaveren ◽  
Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Pragmatic Trial ◽  
Genomic Signature ◽  
Genomic Testing ◽  
Analytic Modeling ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
Genomic Test

Background Genomic tests may improve upon clinical risk estimation with traditional prognostic factors. We aimed to explore how evidence on the prognostic strength of a genomic signature (clinical validity) can contribute to individualized decision making on starting chemotherapy for women with breast cancer (clinical utility). Methods The MINDACT trial was a randomized trial that enrolled 6693 women with early-stage breast cancer. A 70-gene signature (Mammaprint) was used to estimate genomic risk, and clinical risk was estimated by a dichotomized version of the Adjuvant!Online risk calculator. Women with discordant risk results were randomized to the use of chemotherapy. We simulated the full risk distribution of these women and estimated individual benefit, assuming a constant relative effect of chemotherapy. Results The trial showed a prognostic effect of the genomic signature (adjusted hazard ratio 2.4). A decision-analytic modeling approach identified far fewer women as candidates for genetic testing (4% rather than 50%) and fewer benefiting from chemotherapy (3% rather than 27%) as compared with the MINDACT trial report. The selection of women benefitting from genetic testing and chemotherapy depended strongly on the required benefit from treatment and the assumed therapeutic effect of chemotherapy. Conclusions A high-quality pragmatic trial was insufficient to directly inform clinical practice on the utility of a genomic test for individual women. The indication for genomic testing may be far more limited than suggested by the MINDACT trial.

Identification and management of familial breast cancer in Austria

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian F. Singer ◽  
Yen Y. Tan ◽  
Christine Rappaport
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Genetic Counseling ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Familial Breast Cancer ◽  
Prophylactic Surgery ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Counseling And Testing ◽  
Legal Implications

AbstractAimThe aim of this study is to review the legal implications, the technology, the indications and the management of women with a familial background of breast and/or ovarian cancer.MethodsWe have reviewed the literature and national Austrian guidelines to describe the uptake of genetic counseling and the management options offered in Austria.ResultsGenetic testing for theConclusionWhile readily available country-wide counseling has led to an increase in counseling and testing, Austrian legislation mandates “non-directional counseling” resulting in a comparatively low uptake of prophylactic surgery.

Motivations and Concerns of Women Considering Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer: A Comparison Between Affected and At-Risk Probands

2002 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Brandt ◽  
Ellen Hartmann ◽  
Zonera Ali ◽  
Rosemarie Tucci ◽  
Paul Gilman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Genetic Testing

Uptake of genetic counseling and testing in a clinic based population of women with breast cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10524-10524
Author(s):  
Alexandra Wehbe ◽  
Mark A. Manning ◽  
Hadeel Assad ◽  
Kristen Purrington ◽  
Michael S. Simon
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Counseling ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
White Women ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
Cancer Susceptibility Genes ◽  
Counseling And Testing ◽  
Stage Iv Disease

10524 Background: Carriers of pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes have an elevated risk of developing breast, ovarian, and other cancers.We conducted a medical record review to determine the uptake of genetic counseling and testing in a clinic-based population of women with breast cancer. Methods: Medical records of 150 women with breast cancer seen at the Karmanos Cancer Institute between January-December 2018 were reviewed to determine the proportion eligible for genetic testing according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We also assessed genetics referral rates, appointment completion and results of genetic testing. Using chi-square and ANOVA tests, we analyzed the association of demographic and clinical factors with eligibility and referral to genetic counseling. Results: The average age of diagnosis was 57.1 years old, with 68.7% of women diagnosed with stage I-III disease, and 31.3% diagnosed with stage IV disease. There were 91 (60.7%) women who met NCCN criteria for genetic testing, of which 46.2% ultimately underwent genetic testing. Eligible women were more likely to be younger (52.6 vs. 64.0 years old), White (75.0% vs. 54.5%), and have Medicaid (75.0%) or private insurance (72.9%) vs. Medicare (44.8%). Women who met NCCN criteria were 3.5 times more likely to be referred for genetic counseling than those that did not meet eligibility criteria. Women were also more likely to be referred if they had early-stage disease compared to stage IV (67.8% vs. 48.3%), and Medicaid or private insurance compared to Medicare (71.4%, 72.0% and 40.0%, respectively). Of eligible women, 59.3% had a genetic counseling appointment scheduled, and of those, 78.0% attended their appointment. There were no apparent differences in appointment completion based on race with similar percentages of Black and White women completing their appointments (74.0% and 77.0% respectively). Women with stage IV disease were more likely to complete their appointments (83.0%) compared to women with stages I-III (74.0%) and fewer women with Medicare completed their genetic counseling appointment (56.0%) compared to women with Medicaid (83.0%) and women with private insurance (83.0%). Among women who attended their appointment, 95.9% underwent genetic testing. Of women who had genetic testing, 8.5% had a pathogenic variant and 30.4% had a variant of unknown significance. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that lack of genetic counseling referrals contribute to a gap between the need for and completion of genetic testing. By understanding barriers to genetic counseling and testing, future clinical initiatives could effectively improve accessibility to genetic counseling services.

Genetic testing for breast cancer: Optimizing care for patients and their healthcare workers Development of a theoretical framework

2018 ◽  
Vol 92 ◽  
pp. S34
Author(s):  
L. Vandezande ◽  
M. Reymen ◽  
L. Coppens ◽  
E. Plasschaert ◽  
A. Skevee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Theoretical Framework
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document