Gaps in Receipt of Clinically Indicated Genetic Counseling After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

Purpose Little is known about the extent to which genetic counseling is integrated into community practices for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer. We examined the receipt of clinically indicated genetic counseling in these patients. Patients and Methods We surveyed 5,080 patients between the ages of 20 and 79 years, diagnosed from July 2013 to August 2015 with early-stage breast cancer and reported to the SEER registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were linked to SEER clinical data and genetic test results. The study sample (N = 1,711) comprised patients with indications for formal genetic risk evaluation. Results Overall, 47.4% did not get tested, 40.7% tested negative, 7.4% had a variant of uncertain significance only, and 4.5% had a pathogenic mutation. Three quarters (74.6%) received some form of genetic counseling (43.5%, formal counseling and 31.1%, physician-directed discussion). Virtually all tested patients (96.1%) reported some form of genetic discussion (62.2%, formal counseling and 33.9%, physician-directed discussion). However, only one half (50.6%) of those not tested received any discussion about genetics. Younger women were more likely to report some type of counseling, controlling for other factors: odds ratio, 4.5 (95% CI, 2.6 to 8.0); 1.9 (95% CI, 1.1 to 3.3); and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.0 to 2.3) for women younger than 50 years of age, 50 to 59 years of age, and 60 to 69 years of age versus those 70 years of age and older. Patients' assessments of the amount of information they received about whether to get tested were similarly high whether they were counseled by a genetics expert or by a physician only (80.8% v 79.4% stated information was just right, P = .59). Conclusion Less than one half (43.5%) of patients with clinical indications received formal genetic counseling. There is a large gap between mandates for timely pretest formal genetic counseling in higher-risk patients and the reality of practice today.

[1]  Angela P. Wetzel Internet, mail, and mixed‐mode surveys: The tailored design method , 2010 .

[2]  E. Port,et al.  Genetic Testing in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Room for Improvement. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  S. Loi,et al.  Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. , 2017, New England Journal of Medicine.

[4]  Jane C Weeks,et al.  Physicians' attitudes about multiplex tumor genomic testing. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[5]  K. Hughes,et al.  Quality of cancer family history and referral for genetic counseling and testing among oncology practices: a pilot test of quality measures as part of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  R. Jagsi,et al.  Genetic Testing and Counseling Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer , 2017, JAMA.

[7]  K. Offit,et al.  Gene patents and personalized cancer care: impact of the Myriad case on clinical oncology. , 2013, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  E. V. Van Allen The Potential and Challenges of Expanded Germline Testing in Clinical Oncology. , 2017, JAMA.

[9]  C. Childers,et al.  National Estimates of Genetic Testing in Women With a History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  R. Jagsi,et al.  Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  J. Garber,et al.  Randomized noninferiority trial of telephone versus in-person genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  Kenneth Offit,et al.  Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2015. , 2016, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[13]  P. Kantoff,et al.  Mutation Detection in Patients With Advanced Cancer by Universal Sequencing of Cancer-Related Genes in Tumor and Normal DNA vs Guideline-Based Germline Testing , 2017, JAMA.

[14]  S. Hawley,et al.  Treatment experiences of Latinas after diagnosis of breast cancer , 2017, Cancer.

[15]  M. Robson,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology Policy Statement Update: Genetic and Genomic Testing for Cancer Susceptibility. , 2010, Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[16]  K. Hughes Genetic Testing: What Problem Are We Trying to Solve? , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  R. Pollock,et al.  Breast Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Surgeon’s Perspective , 2016, Front. Surg..

[18]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Does rapid genetic counseling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients cause additional psychosocial distress? results from a randomized clinical trial , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[19]  M. Ballinger,et al.  Sociodemographic, psychosocial and clinical factors associated with uptake of genetic counselling for hereditary cancer: a systematic review , 2017, Clinical genetics.

[20]  S. Friedman,et al.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2017. , 2017, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[21]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Impact of rapid genetic counselling and testing on the decision to undergo immediate or delayed prophylactic mastectomy in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: findings from a randomised controlled trial , 2014, British Journal of Cancer.