Barriers in Identification and Referral to Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer Risk: The Perspective of Genetic Service Providers

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 314-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon J. Rolnick ◽  
Alanna K. Rahm ◽  
Jody M. Jackson ◽  
Larissa Nekhlyudov ◽  
Katrina A. B. Goddard ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin G. Allen ◽  
Megan Roberts ◽  
Yue Guan

Despite efforts to increase the availability of clinical genetic testing and counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian (HBOC)-related cancers, these services remain underutilized in clinical settings. There have been few efforts to understand the public’s use of cancer genetic services, particularly for HBOC-related cancers. This analysis is based on data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a U.S.-based nationwide probability sample, to better understand the public’s use of HBOC-related clinical cancer genetic services. Bivariate analyses were used to compute percentages and examine the associations of familial cancer risk for three genetic services outcomes (ever had genetic counseling for cancer risk, ever discussed genetic testing for cancer risk with a provider, and ever had genetic testing for cancer risk). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the association of familial cancer risk and other demographic and health variables with genetic services. Most women (87.67%) in this study were at low risk based on self-reported family history of breast and ovarian cancer, 10.65% were at medium risk, and 1.68% were at high risk. Overall, very small numbers of individuals had ever had genetic counseling (2.78%), discussed genetic testing with their physician (4.55%) or had genetic testing (1.64%). Across all genetic services outcomes, individuals who were at higher familial risk were more likely to have had genetic counseling than those at lower risk (high risk: aOR = 5.869, 95% CI = 2.911–11.835; medium risk: aOR = 4.121, 95% CI = 2.934–5.789), discussed genetic testing (high risk: aOR = 5.133, 95% CI = 2.699–9.764; medium risk: aOR = 3.649, 95% CI = 2.696–4.938), and completed genetic testing (high risk: aOR = 8.531, 95% CI = 3.666–19.851; medium risk aOR = 3.057, 95% CI = 1.835–5.094). Those who perceived themselves as being more likely to develop cancer than the average woman were more likely to engage in genetic counseling (aOR = 1.916, 95% CI = 1.334–2.752), discuss genetic testing (aOR = 3.314, 95% CI = 2.463–4.459) or have had genetic testing (aOR = 1.947, 95% CI = 1.13–3.54). Personal cancer history was also a significant predictor of likelihood to have engaged in genetic services. Our findings highlight: (1) potential under-utilization of cancer genetic services among high risk populations in the U.S. and (2) differences in genetic services use based on individual’s characteristics such as self-reported familial risk, personal history, and beliefs about risk of cancer. These results align with other studies which have noted that awareness and use of genetic services are low in the general population and likely not reaching individuals who could benefit most from screening for inherited cancers. Efforts to promote public awareness of familial cancer risk may lead to better uptake of cancer genetic services.


Breast Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Karin Kast ◽  
Julia Häfner ◽  
Evelin Schröck ◽  
Arne Jahn ◽  
Carmen Werner ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> In clinical routine, not every patient who is offered genetic counselling and diagnostics in order to investigate a familial cancer risk predisposition opts for it. Little is known about acceptance of counselling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in Germany. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> All primary breast cancer cases and patients with DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) treated at the University Hospital of Dresden between 2016 and 2019 were included. The number of tumor board recommendations for genetic counselling on the basis of the GC-HBOC risk criteria was recorded. Acceptance was analyzed by number of cases with counselling in the GC-HBOC-Center Dresden. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Of 996 primary breast cancer and DCIS cases, 262 (26.3%) were eligible for genetic counselling. Recommendation for genetic counselling was accepted by 64.1% (168/262). Of these 90.5% (152/168) opted for molecular genetic analysis. The acceptance rate for counselling increased between 2016 and 2019 from 58.3 to 72.6%. Altogether, 20.4% (31/152) patients were found to carry a pathogenic variant in the breast cancer genes <i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2</i>. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Acceptance of recommendation is increasing as clinical consequences augment. Optimization in providing information about hereditary cancer risk and in accessibility of counselling and testing is required to further improve acceptance of recommendation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (suppl_6) ◽  
pp. vi57-vi57
Author(s):  
Sarah Hummel ◽  
Wendy Kohlmann ◽  
Thomas Kollmeyer ◽  
Robert Jenkins ◽  
Joshua Sonnen ◽  
...  

Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 126 (13) ◽  
pp. 3076-3083 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura‐Maria Madanat‐Harjuoja ◽  
Janne Pitkäniemi ◽  
Elli Hirvonen ◽  
Nea Malila ◽  
Lisa R. Diller

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Hummel ◽  
Wendy Kohlmann ◽  
Thomas M. Kollmeyer ◽  
Robert Jenkins ◽  
Joshua Sonnen ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-83
Author(s):  
Siang Ing Lee ◽  
Mitesh Patel ◽  
Brittany Dutton ◽  
Stephen Weng ◽  
Jocelyn Luveta ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document