Survey on Physicians' Knowledge and Training Needs in Genetic Counseling in Germany.
BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations
Genetic counseling
Genetic testing
Hereditary breast cancer
Journal
Breast care (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1661-3791
Titre abrégé: Breast Care (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101254060
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
05
03
2020
accepted:
25
08
2020
entrez:
4
10
2021
pubmed:
5
10
2021
medline:
5
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In recent years, germline testing of women with a risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer has increased rapidly. This is due to lower costs for new high-throughput sequencing technologies and the manifold preventive and therapeutic options for germline mutation carriers. The growing demand for genetic counseling meets a shortfall of counselors and illustrates the need to involve the treating clinicians in the genetic testing process. This survey was undertaken to assess their state of knowledge and training needs in the field of genetic counseling and testing. A cross-sectional survey within the European Bridges Study (Breast Cancer Risk after Diagnostic Gene Sequencing) was conducted among physician members ( Overall, the study revealed a need for training in risk communication and clinical recommendations for persons at risk. One-third of respondents communicated only relative disease risks (31.5%) instead of absolute disease risks in manageable time spans. Moreover, almost one-third of the respondents (31.2%) communicated bilateral and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy as an option for healthy women and unilateral-diseased breast cancer patients without mutations in high-risk genes (e.g. The survey demonstrates a gap of genetic and risk literacy in a relevant proportion of physicians and the need for appropriate training concepts.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In recent years, germline testing of women with a risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer has increased rapidly. This is due to lower costs for new high-throughput sequencing technologies and the manifold preventive and therapeutic options for germline mutation carriers. The growing demand for genetic counseling meets a shortfall of counselors and illustrates the need to involve the treating clinicians in the genetic testing process. This survey was undertaken to assess their state of knowledge and training needs in the field of genetic counseling and testing.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional survey within the European Bridges Study (Breast Cancer Risk after Diagnostic Gene Sequencing) was conducted among physician members (
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, the study revealed a need for training in risk communication and clinical recommendations for persons at risk. One-third of respondents communicated only relative disease risks (31.5%) instead of absolute disease risks in manageable time spans. Moreover, almost one-third of the respondents (31.2%) communicated bilateral and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy as an option for healthy women and unilateral-diseased breast cancer patients without mutations in high-risk genes (e.g.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The survey demonstrates a gap of genetic and risk literacy in a relevant proportion of physicians and the need for appropriate training concepts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34602945
doi: 10.1159/000511136
pii: brc-0016-0389
pmc: PMC8436720
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
389-395Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 by S. Karger AG, Basel.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare there are no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec 1;35(34):3800-3806
pubmed: 28820644
Fam Cancer. 2018 Jan;17(1):31-41
pubmed: 28623477
Eur J Hum Genet. 2015 Jun;23(6):739-45
pubmed: 25205405
Int J Cancer. 2020 Feb 15;146(4):999-1009
pubmed: 31081934
JAMA. 2017 Sep 5;318(9):801-803
pubmed: 28873143
Br J Cancer. 2014 Jan 21;110(2):535-45
pubmed: 24346285
JAMA. 2010 Sep 1;304(9):967-75
pubmed: 20810374
Breast J. 2019 May;25(3):455-460
pubmed: 30953388
Int J Cancer. 2015 Feb 1;136(3):668-77
pubmed: 24947112
N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 27;379(26):2495-2505
pubmed: 30345884
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Nov 1;33(31):3660-7
pubmed: 26324357
J Community Genet. 2019 Jan;10(1):61-71
pubmed: 29508368
Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Aug 1;22(15):3971-81
pubmed: 26979395
Genet Med. 2006 Oct;8(10):603-14
pubmed: 17079876
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Jun;1(3):277-8
pubmed: 26181167
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Apr 20;36(12):1218-1224
pubmed: 29528794
JAMA. 2019 Aug 20;322(7):652-665
pubmed: 31429903
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Mar 10;26(8):1331-7
pubmed: 18268356
JAMA Surg. 2018 Oct 1;153(10):909-916
pubmed: 29971344
Lancet. 2010 Jul 24;376(9737):235-44
pubmed: 20609467
J Clin Oncol. 2014 May 20;32(15):1547-53
pubmed: 24567435
JAMA. 2017 Jun 20;317(23):2402-2416
pubmed: 28632866
N Engl J Med. 2001 Jul 19;345(3):159-64
pubmed: 11463009
Lancet. 2010 Jul 24;376(9737):245-51
pubmed: 20609468
Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Dec;103(3):1077-82
pubmed: 16904167
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jul 10;35(20):2232-2239
pubmed: 28402748
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2011 May;108(19):323-30
pubmed: 21637635
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 10;377(6):523-533
pubmed: 28578601
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 May;175(1):217-228
pubmed: 30725383
N Engl J Med. 2018 Aug 23;379(8):753-763
pubmed: 30110579
J Med Genet. 2016 Jul;53(7):465-71
pubmed: 26928436
JAMA. 2014 Sep 3;312(9):902-14
pubmed: 25182099