Cancer risk assessment: examining the family physician's role.

BACKGROUND Cancer risk assessment begins in the primary care clinician's office. Essential components of that process include: 1) documentation of personal and family cancer information; 2) identification of families at increased risk for cancer; 3) modification of cancer screening recommendations according to degree of risk; 4) referral of high-risk individuals to cancer genetics clinics. The purpose of this study was to examine these 4 components of primary care cancer risk assessment using data abstracted from patient records at an academic family medicine center. METHODS Ambulatory records of 734 patients were reviewed in their entirety for information relevant to cancer risk assessment. Detail of cancer information was categorized as comprehensive, adequate, or inadequate. Patient records were categorized as suggestive of average, moderate, or high genetic risk for cancer. For patients with a family history of colorectal cancer, modification of colon cancer screening to reflect degree of cancer risk was assessed. Finally, the frequency of cancer genetic referral in high-risk individuals was noted. RESULTS The presence or absence of a family history of cancer was documented in 97.8% of records. There was insufficient information to adequately assess risk in 69.5% of charts. Detail of family cancer documentation was associated with personal history of cancer (P = .001), patient age (P = .001), and physician training status (P = .042), but not with patient or physician gender, duration of care, or completion of a genogram. For persons with a family history of colorectal cancer, compliance with cancer screening individualized to degree of risk was achieved in 50% of patients. Ten patients met criteria for moderate or high genetic risk for cancer. None had been offered cancer genetics consultation. CONCLUSIONS Nearly all records documented the presence or absence of a family history of cancer. However, in those with a positive family history, the detail of information was insufficient to permit risk assessment in over two thirds of individuals; risk-stratified colon cancer screening was not achieved in half of the patients with a family history of colorectal cancer; individuals at moderate or high cancer risk were not identified as such; and those at high risk were not offered cancer genetics referral. In addition to collecting adequate family cancer information, family physicians need to adopt explicit risk assessment criteria to identify, and to optimally care for, those at increased genetic risk for cancer.

[1]  D. Malkin,et al.  Hereditary cancer predisposition in children: Genetic basis and clinical implications , 2006, International journal of cancer.

[2]  Joanna Adams,et al.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic surveillance in individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer: 16 year, prospective, follow-up study , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  E. McCarthy,et al.  Factors associated with colon cancer screening: the role of patient factors and physician counseling. , 2005, Preventive medicine.

[4]  M. Eberl,et al.  Patients with a family history of cancer: identification and management. , 2005, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[5]  O. Olopade,et al.  Confronting genetic testing disparities: knowledge is power. , 2005, JAMA.

[6]  M. Putt,et al.  Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. , 2005, JAMA.

[7]  J. Struewing,et al.  BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: Impact on relationships , 2005, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[8]  H. Valdimarsdottir,et al.  Barriers to colorectal cancer screening: inadequate knowledge by physicians. , 2005, The Mount Sinai journal of medicine, New York.

[9]  Stephanie L. Dickinson,et al.  Racial differences in knowledge, attitudes, and cancer screening practices among a triracial rural population , 2004, Cancer.

[10]  Randa Sifri,et al.  Identifying and Testing for Hereditary Susceptibility to Common Cancers , 2004, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[11]  David F Ransohoff,et al.  Are Physicians Doing Too Much Colonoscopy? A National Survey of Colorectal Surveillance after Polypectomy , 2004, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[12]  R. Gramling,et al.  Family Physician Self-Efficacy With Screening for Inherited Cancer Risk , 2004, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[13]  H. Lynch,et al.  Screening adherence in BRCA1/2 families is associated with primary physicians' behavior , 2004, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[14]  K. Offit,et al.  Referral for cancer genetics consultation: a review and compilation of risk assessment criteria , 2004, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[15]  S. Gallinger,et al.  Relatives of colorectal cancer patients: factors associated with screening behavior. , 2003, American journal of preventive medicine.

[16]  G. Elwyn,et al.  Effects of communicating individual risks in screening programmes: Cochrane systematic review , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  J. Hannigan Direct drug advertising to consumers: when pharma plays doctor. , 2003, Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  Sato Ashida,et al.  Use of fear-appeal techniques in the design of tailored cancer risk communication messages: implications for healthcare providers. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  E. Clayton Ethical, legal, and social implications of genomic medicine. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  C. Klabunde,et al.  Current capacity for endoscopic colorectal cancer screening in the United States: data from the National Cancer Institute Survey of Colorectal Cancer Screening Practices. , 2003, The American journal of medicine.

[21]  B. Kramer,et al.  Reported family history of cancer in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. , 2003, American journal of epidemiology.

[22]  S. Woolf,et al.  Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale-Update based on new evidence. , 2003, Gastroenterology.

[23]  B. Genton,et al.  Improving influenza vaccination rates in the elderly. , 2002, The Journal of family practice.

[24]  Bruce S. Ling,et al.  Family history and colorectal cancer screening: a survey of physician knowledge and practice patterns , 2002, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[25]  P. Bampton,et al.  Applying evidence‐based guidelines improves use of colonoscopy resources in patients with a moderate risk of colorectal neoplasia , 2002, The Medical journal of Australia.

[26]  N. Paynter,et al.  Cancer risk assessment from family history: gaps in primary care practice. , 2002, The Journal of family practice.

[27]  B. Devellis,et al.  Genetic testing for colorectal carcinoma susceptibility , 2001, Cancer.

[28]  Kurt C Stange,et al.  Family history-taking in community family practice: Implications for genetic screening , 2000, Genetics in Medicine.

[29]  R. Croyle,et al.  Risk communication in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[30]  K C Stange,et al.  The family in family practice: is it a reality? , 1998, The Journal of family practice.

[31]  W. Phillips,et al.  Cancer screening by primary care physicians: a comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit. , 1995, American journal of public health.

[32]  P. Engstrom,et al.  Chemoprevention of cancer. , 1994, Current problems in cancer.

[33]  M. Gail,et al.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.