Chris Jacobs
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Chris Jacobs.
Breast Cancer Research | 2014
D. Gareth Evans; Julian Barwell; Diana Eccles; Amanda L. Collins; Louise Izatt; Chris Jacobs; Alan Donaldson; Angela F. Brady; Andrew Cuthbert; Rachel Harrison; Sue Thomas; Anthony Howell; Rgc teams; Zosia Miedzybrodzka; Alex Murray
IntroductionIt is frequent for news items to lead to a short lived temporary increase in interest in a particular health related service, however it is rare for this to have a long lasting effect. In 2013, in the UK in particular, there has been unprecedented publicity in hereditary breast cancer, with Angelina Jolie’s decision to have genetic testing for the BRCA1 gene and subsequently undergo risk reducing mastectomy (RRM), and a pre-release of the NICE guidelines on familial breast cancer in January and their final release on 26th June. The release of NICE guidelines created a lot of publicity over the potential for use of chemoprevention using tamoxifen or raloxifene. However, the longest lasting news story was the release of details of film actress Angelina Jolie’s genetic test and surgery.MethodsTo assess the potential effects of the ‘Angelina Jolie’ effect, referral data specific to breast cancer family history was obtained from around the UK for the years 2012 and 2013. A consortium of over 30 breast cancer family history clinics that have contributed to two research studies on early breast surveillance were asked to participate as well as 10 genetics centres. Monthly referrals to each service were collated and increases from 2012 to 2013 assessed.ResultsData from 12 family history clinics and 9 regional genetics services showed a rise in referrals from May 2013 onwards. Referrals were nearly 2.5 fold in June and July 2013 from 1,981 (2012) to 4,847 (2013) and remained at around two-fold to October 2013. Demand for BRCA1/2 testing almost doubled and there were also many more enquiries for risk reducing mastectomy. Internal review shows that there was no increase in inappropriate referrals.ConclusionsThe Angelina Jolie effect has been long lasting and global, and appears to have increased referrals to centres appropriately.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2015
Ranjit Manchanda; Rosa Legood; Matthew Burnell; Alistair McGuire; Maria Raikou; Kelly Loggenberg; Jane Wardle; Saskia C. Sanderson; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Rakshit Desai; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Ian Tomlinson; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs
Background: Population-based testing for BRCA1/2 mutations detects the high proportion of carriers not identified by cancer family history (FH)–based testing. We compared the cost-effectiveness of population-based BRCA testing with the standard FH-based approach in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods: A decision-analytic model was developed to compare lifetime costs and effects amongst AJ women in the UK of BRCA founder-mutation testing amongst: 1) all women in the population age 30 years or older and 2) just those with a strong FH (≥10% mutation risk). The model assumes that BRCA carriers are offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and annual MRI/mammography screening or risk-reducing mastectomy. Model probabilities utilize the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial/published literature to estimate total costs, effects in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cancer incidence, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and population impact. Costs are reported at 2010 prices. Costs/outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. We used deterministic/probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to evaluate model uncertainty. Results: Compared with FH-based testing, population-screening saved 0.090 more life-years and 0.101 more QALYs resulting in 33 days’ gain in life expectancy. Population screening was found to be cost saving with a baseline-discounted ICER of -£2079/QALY. Population-based screening lowered ovarian and breast cancer incidence by 0.34% and 0.62%. Assuming 71% testing uptake, this leads to 276 fewer ovarian and 508 fewer breast cancer cases. Overall, reduction in treatment costs led to a discounted cost savings of £3.7 million. Deterministic sensitivity analysis and 94% of simulations on PSA (threshold £20000) indicated that population screening is cost-effective, compared with current NHS policy. Conclusion: Population-based screening for BRCA mutations is highly cost-effective compared with an FH-based approach in AJ women age 30 years and older.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2015
Ranjit Manchanda; Kelly Loggenberg; Saskia C. Sanderson; Matthew Burnell; Jane Wardle; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Rakshit Desai; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Ian Tomlinson; Alistair McGuire; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs
Background: Technological advances raise the possibility of systematic population-based genetic testing for cancer-predisposing mutations, but it is uncertain whether benefits outweigh disadvantages. We directly compared the psychological/quality-of-life consequences of such an approach to family history (FH)–based testing. Methods: In a randomized controlled trial of BRCA1/2 gene-mutation testing in the Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population, we compared testing all participants in the population screening (PS) arm with testing those fulfilling standard FH-based clinical criteria (FH arm). Following a targeted community campaign, AJ participants older than 18 years were recruited by self-referral after pretest genetic counseling. The effects of BRCA1/2 genetic testing on acceptability, psychological impact, and quality-of-life measures were assessed by random effects regression analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One thousand, one hundred sixty-eight AJ individuals were counseled, 1042 consented, 1034 were randomly assigned (691 women, 343 men), and 1017 were eligible for analysis. Mean age was 54.3 (SD = 14.66) years. Thirteen BRCA1/2 carriers were identified in the PS arm, nine in the FH arm. Five more carriers were detected among FH-negative FH-arm participants following study completion. There were no statistically significant differences between the FH and PS arms at seven days or three months on measures of anxiety, depression, health anxiety, distress, uncertainty, and quality-of-life. Contrast tests indicated that overall anxiety (P = .0001) and uncertainty (P = .005) associated with genetic testing decreased; positive experience scores increased (P = .0001); quality-of-life and health anxiety did not change with time. Overall, 56% of carriers did not fulfill clinical criteria for genetic testing, and the BRCA1/2 prevalence was 2.45%. Conclusion: Compared with FH-based testing, population-based genetic testing in Ashkenazi Jews doesn’t adversely affect short-term psychological/quality-of-life outcomes and may detect 56% additional BRCA carriers.
Psychology & Health | 2011
Caroline Dancyger; Mel Wiseman; Chris Jacobs; Jonathan A. Smith; Melissa Wallace; Susan Michie
Genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer reveals significant risk information about ones chances of developing cancer. It is important to study communication processes in families where members are undergoing genetic testing because the information received is crucial not just to the individual concerned but also to other members of the biological family. This study investigates family communication of BRCA1/2 test results from both the informants’ and recipients’ perspectives. A total of 10 female patients and 22 of their relatives were interviewed. Patients’ and their relatives described feelings of responsibility for sharing genetic information within the family to enable others to reduce their risks of developing cancer. However, there were limits to an individuals’ responsibility once key family members had been informed, who then had to take responsibility for continuing dissemination of information. Whilst there was an implicit responsibility to inform the family of a mutation, information was edited or withheld in the best interest of relatives, dependent upon their perceived emotional readiness, resilience and current life stage and circumstances. The pre-existing family culture and the impact previous cancer diagnoses had upon the family also influenced the process of communication. Findings are discussed in relation to extant literature and implications for clinical practice are considered.
European Journal of Human Genetics | 2010
Caroline Dancyger; Jonathan A. Smith; Chris Jacobs; Melissa Wallace; Susan Michie
Genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer reveals significant risk information regarding ones chances of developing cancer that has potential implications for patients and their families. This study reports on the motivations and attitudes of index patients and their relatives towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. In total, 10 female index patients and 20 of their relatives were interviewed regarding their experiences of communicating genetic information within their families, and their motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing. The analysis found two types of ‘family groups’: groups strongly committed to genetic testing and groups uncertain about testing. Within committed family groups, index patients and their relatives felt obliged to be tested for others, leading some relatives to be tested without having fully thought through their decision or the implications of knowing their mutation status. These family groups also described considerations in relation to the value of testing for themselves. In family groups uncertain about testing, relatives had not attended for predictive testing, had postponed decision making until some point in the future or had expressed ambivalence about the value of testing for themselves. Results suggest the value of explicitly acknowledging motivations for genetic testing within the context of family obligations, relationships and communication, and the possible value of involving family members in genetic counselling and decision making from a familys first contact with genetic services.
Journal of Medical Genetics | 2000
David Ellis; Jill Greenman; Shirley Hodgson; Sam McCALL; Fiona Lalloo; June Cameron; Louise Izatt; Gillian Scott; Chris Jacobs; Sally Watts; Wendy Chorley; Chris Perrett; Kay D. MacDermot; Shehla Mohammed; Gareth Evans; Christopher G. Mathew
Editor—Germline mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes cause predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer.1Epidemiological evidence and linkage studies suggested that the likelihood that a woman with breast cancer has a genetic susceptibility to the condition is greater the younger she was at diagnosis and with increasing extent of family history of the disease. Studies of the prevalence of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in women with breast cancer has enabled the frequency of mutations to be determined in women with different ages at diagnosis and extent of family history of breast cancer.2 3 The CASH study into the attributable risk of breast and ovarian cancer estimated that 33% of all breast cancers diagnosed by the age of 29 years, and 22% diagnosed by the age of 30-39 years, are the result of an inherited mutation.4However, the proportion of breast cancer cases diagnosed by 40 years resulting from a BRCA1 mutation was predicted to be 5.3%.5 Previous population based studies of the prevalence of BRCA1 mutations in early onset breast cancer have been in cases unselected for family history, and the majority of mutation carriers detected did have some degree of family history of either breast or ovarian cancer.6-10 The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of BRCA1 mutations in a large series of British patients with a young age of onset and no known family history of the disease, since such patients are referred relatively frequently for genetic counselling. The presence of BRCA1 mutations in a significant proportion of these patients would have important implications for the planning of a mutation screening strategy in diagnostic services. Patients were ascertained from the Imperial …
Journal of Genetic Counseling | 2011
Jonathan A. Smith; Caroline Dancyger; Melissa Wallace; Chris Jacobs; Susan Michie
It is important to study communication processes in families where members are undergoing testing for genetic conditions because the information received from such testing is crucial not just to the individual concerned but also to other members of the biological family. This topic has received little research attention, in part because of the complexities of methodology required. In this paper we present the development of a method specifically designed for the examination of the content and process of communication of genetic information in families. The method aims to maximize ecological validity as far as is possible. We describe how participants and other family members are recruited and how data were collected. We outline three main data analytic strategies: a graphic to show how genetic information changes as it flows from clinic and through the family, an intensive qualitative analysis of the meaning and impact of the genetic information to different family members, and an informative genogram which plots key family dynamics. This method will be illustrated in relation to a study of ten family-groups where one individual has been found to carry a genetic mutation predisposing them to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.
Journal of Medical Genetics | 2016
Ranjit Manchanda; Matthew Burnell; Kelly Loggenberg; Rakshit Desai; Jane Wardle; Saskia C. Sanderson; Sue Gessler; Lucy Side; Nyala Balogun; Ajith Kumar; Huw Dorkins; Yvonne Wallis; Cyril Chapman; Ian Tomlinson; Rohan Taylor; Chris Jacobs; Rosa Legood; Maria Raikou; Alistair McGuire; Uziel Beller; Usha Menon; Ian Jacobs
Background Newer approaches to genetic counselling are required for population-based testing. We compare traditional face-to-face genetic counselling with a DVD-assisted approach for population-based BRCA1/2 testing. Methods A cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial in the London Ashkenazi Jewish population. Inclusion criteria Ashkenazi Jewish men/women >18 years; exclusion criteria: (a) known BRCA1/2 mutation, (b) previous BRCA1/2 testing and (c) first-degree relative of BRCA1/2 carrier. Ashkenazi Jewish men/women underwent pre-test genetic counselling prior to BRCA1/2 testing in the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial (ISRCTN73338115). Genetic counselling clinics (clusters) were randomised to traditional counselling (TC) and DVD-based counselling (DVD-C) approaches. DVD-C involved a DVD presentation followed by shorter face-to-face genetic counselling. Outcome measures included genetic testing uptake, cancer risk perception, increase in knowledge, counselling time and satisfaction (Genetic Counselling Satisfaction Scale). Random-effects models adjusted for covariates compared outcomes between TC and DVD-C groups. One-sided 97.5% CI was used to determine non-inferiority. Secondary outcomes: relevance, satisfaction, adequacy, emotional impact and improved understanding with the DVD; cost-minimisation analysis for TC and DVD-C approaches. Results 936 individuals (clusters=256, mean-size=3.6) were randomised to TC (n=527, clusters=134) and DVD-C (n=409, clusters=122) approaches. Groups were similar at baseline, mean age=53.9 (SD=15) years, women=66.8%, men=33.2%. DVD-C was non-inferior to TC for increase in knowledge (d=−0.07; lower 97.5% CI=−0.41), counselling satisfaction (d=−0.38, 97.5% CI=1.2) and risk perception (d=0.08; upper 97.5% CI=3.1). Group differences and CIs did not cross non-inferiority margins. DVD-C was equivalent to TC for uptake of genetic testing (d=−3%; lower/upper 97.5% CI −7.9%/1.7%) and superior for counselling time (20.4 (CI 18.7 to 22.2) min reduction (p<0.005)). 98% people found the DVD length and information satisfactory. 85–89% felt it improved their understanding of risks/benefits/implications/purpose of genetic testing. 95% would recommend it to others. The cost of genetic counselling for DVD-C=£7787 and TC=£17 307. DVD-C resulted in cost savings=£9520 (£14/volunteer). Conclusions DVD-C is an effective, acceptable, non-inferior, time-saving and cost-efficient alternative to TC. Trial registration number ISRCTN 73338115.
European Journal of Human Genetics | 2015
Chris Jacobs; Caroline Dancyger; Jonathan A. Smith; Susan Michie
This observational study aimed to (i) compare the accuracy of information recalled by patients and relatives following genetic counselling about a newly identified BRCA1/2 mutation, (ii) identify differences in accuracy of information about genetics and hereditary cancer and (iii) investigate whether accuracy among relatives improved when information was provided directly by genetics health professionals. Semistructured interviews following results from consultations with 10 breast/ovarian cancer patients and 22 relatives were audio-recorded and transcribed. Information provided by the genetics health professional was tracked through the families and coded for accuracy. Accuracy was analysed using the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test. Sources of information were tested using Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficient. Fifty-three percent of the information recalled by patients was accurate. Accuracy of recall among relatives was significantly lower than that among patients (P=0.017). Both groups recalled a lower proportion of information about hereditary cancer than about genetics (P=0.005). Relatives who learnt the information from the patient alone recalled significantly less accurate information than those informed directly by genetics health professionals (P=0.001). Following genetic counselling about a BRCA1/2 mutation, accuracy of recall was low among patients and relatives, particularly about hereditary cancer. Multiple sources of information, including direct contact with genetics health professionals, may improve the accuracy of information among relatives.
Familial Cancer | 2007
Chris Jacobs; R. Rawson; C. Campion; C. Caulfield; J. Heath; Christopher Burton; F. Kavalier
BackgroundPatients from ethnic minorities are under-represented in referrals to cancer genetics services. In a regional genetics centre that serves two London boroughs, the existing service attracts 3% of its referrals from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) and other ethnic groups, despite the fact that these groups make up 34% of the population.ObjectivesTo improve access to familial cancer risk assessment in a socially and ethnically diverse population.SettingThe London boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark.DesignCommunity-based, nurse-led clinics were established for people who were concerned about their familial cancer risk. Patients were asked to triage themselves by answering three questions. Self-referral was encouraged.Main outcome measuresData were gathered on ethnicity of clients, cancer risk, source of referral and patient and health professional satisfaction with the service.ResultsOf the 415 people who have accessed the service, 46% were from not White British groups and 67% referred themselves to the service, demonstrating the success of this model in reaching ‘hard to reach’ groups. Thirty-seven percent of patients were assessed as being at population risk and 63% were assessed as being at moderate risk or higher, showing that the clinics were meeting an unmet need in the community.