Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of genetic counseling referral for ovarian cancer patients who are at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: An analysis was performed of new ovarian cancer patients who were seen at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2007. Patients at substantial (more than 20-25%) risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified and records reviewed for referral to genetic counseling. Time to referral was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 3,765 epithelial ovarian cancer patients were seen during the 9-year period. On average, 23.8% of patients met substantial-risk criteria for BRCA mutations. In 1999, only 12% of patients at substantial-risk were referred. Referral improved over time with 48% referred in 2007 (P<.001). Newly diagnosed patients were more often referred for genetic counseling than new patients with recurrent disease or those seen as second opinions. African-American women meeting substantial-risk criteria were less likely to be referred than were white or Hispanic women (P=.009). CONCLUSION: Although dictated family history was accurate, interpretation of risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and subsequent referral to genetic counseling was poor. Although there was significant improvement over time, 50% of substantial-risk patients still were missed. Systematic efforts to identify those ovarian cancer patients at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 are necessary.

Timing of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing in women with ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine when, in reference to the course of their treatment, women with ovarian cancer are seen for genetic counseling, as well as to determine what factors influence this timing. METHODS: : Single institution retrospective chart review of patients with ovarian cancer who underwent BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of our sample (n = 100) were seen for genetic counseling after ovarian cancer recurrence. In four cases, genetic test results were disclosed to next of kin. Thirty percent of women seen for genetic counseling after recurrence received their initial treatment elsewhere. Women with a history of breast cancer were significantly more likely to be seen for genetic counseling at an earlier phase of their treatment than women with no history of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: We found that one third of patients with ovarian cancer who underwent genetic testing were seen for initial genetic counseling after disease recurrence. In some cases, genetic counseling took place during the end of life care, with genetic test results disclosed to next of kin. Given the poor prognosis of women with recurrent ovarian cancer, we advocate providing genetic counseling at the time of initial ovarian cancer treatment both in comprehensive cancer centers and in community oncology settings.