Barriers to genetic testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: Do surgeons limit testing?

2017 ◽  
Vol 214 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Hafertepen ◽  
Alyssa Pastorino ◽  
Nichole Morman ◽  
Jennifer Snow ◽  
Deepa Halaharvi ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13108-e13108
Author(s):  
Drew Murray ◽  
Mounika Mandadi

e13108 Background: About 5-10% of breast cancers are hereditary. Identifying women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes helps implement screening strategies, chemoprevention regimens, preventative surgeries and identify family members at risk. Little is known about reasons for non-compliance with genetic testing after referral by an oncologist. To gain insight we investigated these barriers in a population of patients in Louisville, Kentucky. Methods: The study design was a IRB approved single institution retrospective analysis of all newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in the year 2014. Data on age, gender, race, education, insurance status, family history, referral orders and genetic testing results were analyzed for 204 patients. Characteristics of patients who received genetic testing after referral was made were compared to patients who did not receive genetic testing, despite referral. The categorical variables were compared using the Pearson Chi-square test for contingency tables while the t-test was used for continuous variables. Significance level was set at p≤0.05. All calculations are performed with SAS statistical software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Results: Of 204 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seen in 2014, 109 met NCCN guidelines for genetic testing. 89 total patients were referred for genetic testing. 67 patients received genetic testing after referral, while 22 patients did not receive the testing despite being referred. 29 patients met criteria for testing but were never referred. Statistical significance existed (P = 0.019) for the insurance status variable, those with private insurance being more likely to receive testing after being referred, and those without insurance being less likely to show up for genetic testing after being referred. There was no statistical significance for age(P = 0.787), race(P = 0.555), or education (P = 0.322). Conclusions: Being covered by private insurance was associated with increased completion of genetic testing after being referred by an oncologist. Age, race, and education did not impact the likelihood of receiving testing if referred. Further investigations will be made into reasons for non-referral in patients who met NCCN guidelines for testing.


2020 ◽  
Vol 122 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-143
Author(s):  
Mary K. Ladd ◽  
Beth N. Peshkin ◽  
Claudine Isaacs ◽  
Gillian Hooker ◽  
Shawna Willey ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Nils Martin Bruckmann ◽  
Julian Kirchner ◽  
Lale Umutlu ◽  
Wolfgang Peter Fendler ◽  
Robert Seifert ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives To compare the diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients. Material and methods A cohort of 154 therapy-naive patients with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer was enrolled in this study prospectively. All patients underwent a whole-body [18F]FDG PET/MRI, computed tomography (CT) scan, and a bone scintigraphy prior to therapy. All datasets were evaluated regarding the presence of bone metastases. McNemar χ2 test was performed to compare sensitivity and specificity between the modalities. Results Forty-one bone metastases were present in 7/154 patients (4.5%). Both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI alone were able to detect all of the patients with histopathologically proven bone metastases (sensitivity 100%; specificity 100%) and did not miss any of the 41 malignant lesions (sensitivity 100%). CT detected 5/7 patients (sensitivity 71.4%; specificity 98.6%) and 23/41 lesions (sensitivity 56.1%). Bone scintigraphy detected only 2/7 patients (sensitivity 28.6%) and 15/41 lesions (sensitivity 36.6%). Furthermore, CT and scintigraphy led to false-positive findings of bone metastases in 2 patients and in 1 patient, respectively. The sensitivity of PET/MRI and MRI alone was significantly better compared with CT (p < 0.01, difference 43.9%) and bone scintigraphy (p < 0.01, difference 63.4%). Conclusion [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI are significantly better than CT or bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Both CT and bone scintigraphy show a substantially limited sensitivity in detection of bone metastases. Key Points • [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI alone are significantly superior to CT and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. • Radiation-free whole-body MRI might serve as modality of choice in detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients.


2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (11) ◽  
pp. 1122
Author(s):  
Rajeshkumar Balasubramanian ◽  
D. Leff ◽  
F. Aref ◽  
L. Wilding ◽  
S. Salakianathan ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
E. Una ◽  
M.J. Borau ◽  
J. Nieto ◽  
A. De la Torre ◽  
G. Fernandez ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document