Sue Gessler

Cost-effectiveness of Population Screening for BRCA Mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish Women Compared With Family History–Based Testing

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.

Outcome of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA carriers and women of unknown mutation status

Please cite this paper as: Manchanda R, Abdelraheim A, Johnson M, Rosenthal A, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Burnell M, Side L, Gessler S, Saridogan E, Oram D, Jacobs I, Menon U. Outcome of risk‐reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy in BRCA carriers and women of unknown mutation status. BJOG 2011;118:814–824.

Population Testing for Cancer Predisposing BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish Community: A Randomized Controlled Trial

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.

Factors influencing uptake and timing of risk reducing salpingo- oophorectomy in women at risk of familial ovarian cancer: A competing risk time to event analysis

Please cite this paper as: Manchanda R, Burnell M, Abdelraheim A, Johnson M, Sharma A, Benjamin E, Brunell C, Saridogan E, Gessler S, Oram D, Side L, Rosenthal A, Jacobs I, Menon U. Factors influencing uptake and timing of risk reducing salpingo‐oophorectomy in women at risk of familial ovarian cancer: a competing risk time to event analysis. BJOG 2012;119:527–536.

Recruitment of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients proved challenging in a multicentre biobanking study

OBJECTIVE To explore the challenges of recruiting ovarian cancer patients and healthy controls to a cancer biobanking study. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING The study was set up in gynecological cancer centers in 10 National Health Service trusts across the United Kingdom. Women were approached if they were undergoing investigations/awaiting treatment for ovarian cancer, had a previous diagnosis of ovarian cancer, or were attending for annual screening in an ovarian cancer screening trial. Those who consented completed a detailed epidemiologic questionnaire, provided blood and tissue samples if appropriate. RESULTS The overall proportion of those recruited compared with the expected targets was 76.4% for healthy controls, 86.0% for old cases, and 46.9% for new cases. Only 4 of 10 (40%) centers recruited over 50% of their target for new cases. Unwillingness to participate was reported as primarily because of patients being too unwell, wanting to focus only on their treatment, or having insufficient time because of conflicting medical appointments. Concerns about use of personal data or tissue and blood samples for genetic research and lack of direct benefit were reported as significant challenges to recruitment. CONCLUSION When setting recruitment targets for patients undergoing investigations or awaiting treatment for cancer (new cases), it is important to consider lower response rates because of various patient, logistical, and trial-specific challenges.

Family history and women with ovarian cancer: is it asked and does it matter?: An observational study.

Objective The objective of the study was to determine how many women in an ovarian cancer (OC) study cohort had a family history (FH) recorded in their case notes and whether appropriate action was taken on the basis of that FH. Methods This was a review of patient case-note data of women in a randomized controlled trial of follow-up after primary treatment for OC. Available case notes of 114 women recruited at 3 UK gynecologic cancer centers in a 2-year period between January 2006 and 2008 were examined. Case-note entries for the period from first hospital consultation to 2 years after completion of primary treatment were included. Outcome measures were (1) recording of an FH of cancer in the case notes, (2) whether appropriate action had been taken on the basis of the FH in those women with affected relatives, and (3) characterizing insufficient FH records. Results Family history was not consistently recorded. Although FH was recorded in the majority of women, 14 women had no FH recorded. In 63 women, the FH was recorded as not significant, and in 15 cases, FH information was insufficient to complete a risk assessment. Twenty-two women had significant FH meeting criteria for specialist genetics referral. In 15 of these 22 cases, the relevant history suggestive of hereditary breast cancer and OC (due to BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations) or Lynch syndrome had been documented, but no action was recorded, and its significance was not appreciated. Conclusions These data indicate that training in recognizing relevant FH is needed for clinicians looking after women with OC. Research is necessary to determine the barriers in taking and interpreting an FH and to determine the optimal time for broaching FH issues during a woman’s care pathway. This will improve the accuracy of FH recording and ensure families with OC have access to appropriate surveillance and genetic testing.

Population-Based, Risk-Stratified Genetic Testing for Ovarian Cancer Risk: A Focus Group Study

Study Purpose: A population-based risk stratification programme for ovarian cancer (OC) may improve OC survival by identifying women at increased risk and implementing an appropriate risk management strategy. The present study explored attitudes towards an OC risk stratification programme incorporating predictive genetic testing and risk-stratified screening as part of a larger study investigating OC screening. Methods: Focus groups consisting of 56 members of the general public (mean age 45 years; 34% non-white) were conducted using a hypothetical scenario. The group sessions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. Results: There was strong support for the proposed programme. Genetic testing and risk-stratified screening was thought to raise awareness, offer reassurance and offer opportunities for early intervention. Anxiety was only mentioned in relation to receiving a diagnosis of OC and not with screening per se. Perhaps because lay models of cancer already embrace both environmental and genetic factors, a low-risk result was not anticipated to result in a false sense of immunity. Unexpectedly, participants also wanted to receive cancer prevention advice in conjunction with genetic testing; screening alone was not regarded as sufficient. Conclusion: The encouraging results from this small study warrant further large-scale research into risk-stratified OC screening.

Adjusting the frequency of mammography screening on the basis of genetic risk: Attitudes among women in the UK.

Purpose To explore public attitudes towards modifying frequency of mammography screening based on genetic risk. Methods Home-based interviews were carried out with a population-based sample of 942 women aged 18–74 years in the UK. Demographic characteristics and perceived breast cancer (BC) risk were examined as predictors of support for risk-stratified BC screening and of the acceptability of raised or lowered screening frequency based on genetic risk, using multivariate logistic regression. Results Over two-thirds of respondents (65.8%) supported the idea of varying screening frequency on the basis of genetic risk. The majority (85.4%) were willing to have more frequent breast screening if they were found to be at higher risk, but fewer (58.8%) were willing to have less frequent screening if at lower risk (t (956) = 15.6, p < 0.001). Ethnic minority status was associated with less acceptability of more frequent screening (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.21–0.74), but there were no other significant demographic correlates. Higher perceived risk of BC was associated with greater acceptability of more frequent screening (OR = 1.71, 95%CI = 1.27–2.30). Conclusion Women were positive about adjusting the frequency of mammography screening in line with personal genetic risk, but it will be important to develop effective communication materials to minimise resistance to reducing screening frequency for those at lower genetic risk.

What influences midwives in estimating labour pain

Clinicians’ estimates of patients’ pain are frequently used as a basis for delivering care, and the characteristics of the clinician and of the patient influence this estimate.

Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic testing for cancer risk among ethnic minority groups: a systematic review

BackgroundGenetic testing for risk of hereditary cancer can help patients to make important decisions about prevention or early detection. US and UK studies show that people from ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive genetic testing. It is important to understand various groups’ awareness of genetic testing and its acceptability to avoid further disparities in health care. This review aims to identify and detail awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic counselling/testing for cancer risk prediction in ethnic minority groups.MethodsA search was carried out in PsycInfo, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. Search terms referred to ethnicity, genetic testing/counselling, cancer, awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions. Quantitative and qualitative studies, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2015, were included.ResultsForty-one studies were selected for review: 39 from the US, and two from Australia. Results revealed low awareness and knowledge of genetic counselling/testing for cancer susceptibility amongst ethnic minority groups including African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. Attitudes towards genetic testing were generally positive; perceived benefits included positive implications for personal health and being able to inform family. However, negative attitudes were also evident, particularly the anticipated emotional impact of test results, and concerns about confidentiality, stigma, and discrimination. Chinese Australian groups were less studied, but of interest was a finding from qualitative research indicating that different views of who close family members are could impact on reported family history of cancer, which could in turn impact a risk assessment.ConclusionInterventions are needed to increase awareness and knowledge of genetic testing for cancer risk and to reduce the perceived stigma and taboo surrounding the topic of cancer in ethnic minority groups. More detailed research is needed in countries other than the US and across a broader spectrum of ethnic minority groups to develop effective culturally sensitive approaches for cancer prevention.