Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 77
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
BJOG ; 129(12): 1970-1980, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35781768

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Ashkenazi-Jewish (AJ) population-based BRCA testing is acceptable, cost-effective and amplifies primary prevention for breast & ovarian cancer. However, data describing lifestyle impact are lacking. We report long-term results of population-based BRCA testing on lifestyle behaviour and cancer risk perception. DESIGN: Two-arm randomised controlled trials (ISRCTN73338115, GCaPPS): (a) population-screening (PS); (b) family history (FH)/clinical criteria testing. SETTING: North London AJ-population. POPULATION/SAMPLE: AJ women/men >18 years. EXCLUSIONS: prior BRCA testing or first-degree relatives of BRCA-carriers. METHODS: Participants were recruited through self-referral. All participants received informed pre-test genetic counselling. The intervention included genetic testing for three AJ BRCA-mutations: 185delAG(c.68_69delAG), 5382insC(c.5266dupC) and 6174delT(c.5946delT). This was undertaken for all participants in the PS arm and participants fulfilling FH/clinical criteria in the FH arm. Patients filled out customised/validated questionnaires at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups. Generalised linear-mixed models adjusted for covariates and appropriate contrast tests were used for between-group/within-group analysis of lifestyle and behavioural outcomes along with evaluating factors associated with these outcomes. Outcomes are adjusted for multiple testing (Bonferroni method), with P < 0.0039 considered significant. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lifestyle/behavioural outcomes at baseline/1-year/2-year/3-year follow-ups. RESULTS: 1034 participants were randomised to PS (n = 530) or FH (n = 504) arms. No significant difference was identified between PS- and FH-based BRCA testing approaches in terms of dietary fruit/vegetable/meat consumption, vitamin intake, alcohol quantity/ frequency, smoking behaviour (frequency/cessation), physical activity/exercise or routine breast mammogram screening behaviour, with outcomes not affected by BRCA test result. Cancer risk perception decreased with time following BRCA testing, with no difference between FH/PS approaches, and the perception of risk was lowest in BRCA-negative participants. Men consumed fewer fruits/vegetables/vitamins and more meat/alcohol than women (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Population-based and FH-based AJ BRCA testing have similar long-term lifestyle impacts on smoking, alcohol, dietary fruit/vegetable/meat/vitamin, exercise, breast screening participation and reduced cancer risk perception.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Ovarian Neoplasms , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetic Testing , Humans , Jews/genetics , Life Style , Male , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Vitamins
2.
Gynecol Oncol ; 150(2): 288-292, 2018 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29807695

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Data on the outcome of stage IIA1 cervical cancer is limited, as these tumors comprise a small percentage of early tumors. NCCN guidelines suggest consideration of surgical management for small tumors with vaginal involvement. Our objective was to evaluate the risk of adjuvant radiotherapy in stage IIA1 cervical cancer and its associated features, in order to improve selection of patients for surgical management. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study comparing surgically treated cervical cancer patients with stage IB1 and stage IIA1 disease. Women treated between 2000 and 2015 in ten Israeli medical centers were included. Patient and disease features were compared between stages. The relative risk (Fisher's exact test) of receiving post-operative radiation was calculated and compared for each risk factor. A general linear model (GLM) was used for multivariable analysis. RESULTS: 199 patients were included, of whom 21 had stage IIA1 disease. Most features were comparable for stage IB1 and stage IIA1 disease, although patients with vaginal involvement were more likely to have close surgical margins (23.8% vs 8.5%, p = 0.03). Patients with stage IIA1 disease were more likely to receive radiation after surgery (76% vs. 46%, RR = 1.65 (1.24-2.2), p = 0.011). Vaginal involvement as well as depth of stromal invasion, LVSI and lymph node metastases were independent predictors of radiation on multivariable general linear modeling. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical cancer patients with vaginal involvement are highly more likely to require postoperative radiation. We recommend careful evaluation of these patients before surgical management is offered.


Subject(s)
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Postoperative Care , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant , Retrospective Studies , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology
3.
J Med Genet ; 53(7): 472-80, 2016 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26993268

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Mutation/genetics , Female , Genetic Counseling/methods , Genetic Testing/methods , Humans , Jews/genetics , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
4.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 111(39): 14205-10, 2014 Sep 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25192939

ABSTRACT

In the Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population of Israel, 11% of breast cancer and 40% of ovarian cancer are due to three inherited founder mutations in the cancer predisposition genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. For carriers of these mutations, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy significantly reduces morbidity and mortality. Population screening for these mutations among AJ women may be justifiable if accurate estimates of cancer risk for mutation carriers can be obtained. We therefore undertook to determine risks of breast and ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers ascertained irrespective of personal or family history of cancer. Families harboring mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 were ascertained by identifying mutation carriers among healthy AJ males recruited from health screening centers and outpatient clinics. Female relatives of the carriers were then enrolled and genotyped. Among the female relatives with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, cumulative risk of developing either breast or ovarian cancer by age 60 and 80, respectively, were 0.60 (± 0.07) and 0.83 (± 0.07) for BRCA1 carriers and 0.33 (± 0.09) and 0.76 (± 0.13) for BRCA2 carriers. Risks were higher in recent vs. earlier birth cohorts (P = 0.006). High cancer risks in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers identified through healthy males provide an evidence base for initiating a general screening program in the AJ population. General screening would identify many carriers who are not evaluated by genetic testing based on family history criteria. Such a program could serve as a model to investigate implementation and outcomes of population screening for genetic predisposition to cancer in other populations.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Testing/methods , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Female , Genetic Carrier Screening , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetics, Population , Humans , Israel/epidemiology , Jews/genetics , Male , Middle Aged , Ovarian Neoplasms/epidemiology , Risk Factors
5.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 24(2): 233-7, 2014 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24378620

ABSTRACT

UNLABELLED: Controversy exists about the impact of BRCA1/2 mutations on female fertility. Previous studies are small or based on indirect parameters (eg, self-reported infertility), which depend on additional factors unrelated to true fertility potential. Most of the previous studies did not use strict fertility markers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the relation between carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and fertility using the level of anti-müllerian hormone (AMH), which has been previously shown to be an accurate marker of ovarian reserve and fertility potential. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-one healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, aged 26 to 40 years, attending a multidisciplinary breast and ovarian cancer surveillance clinic, were tested for AMH levels using a 2-site ELISA. Levels were compared with those of our general population and with well-established normograms of the general population. RESULTS: The mean age of carriers was 33.2 years (26-39 years; SD, 3.99 years). The mean parity of carriers was 1.97 (0-7; SD, 1.49). All women carried at least 1 Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation. The AMH levels for most carriers were in the reference range, 2.71 ± 0.59 ng/mL (approximately 50th percentile of normograms). These levels were similar to those in the control group, in which the AMH levels were 2.02 ± 0.12 ng/mL (P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The AMH levels of healthy BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are similar to those of noncarrier women matched for age; therefore, their ovarian reserve is comparable. This is the only study, to the best of our knowledge, that directly examines ovarian reserve in a relatively large group of carriers with an accurate marker. The results of this study may possibly give reassurance to female carriers concerning fertility potential.


Subject(s)
Fertility/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Markers , Ovary , Adult , Anti-Mullerian Hormone/genetics , Carrier State/blood , Female , Genetic Carrier Screening , Humans , Pilot Projects
6.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(8): 1447, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30247246
7.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(7): 1247, 2018 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30142122
8.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(6): 1057, 2018 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29975289
9.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(1): 1, 2018 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29206663
10.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(4): 656, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29688968
11.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(5): 853, 2018 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29782481
12.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 28(3): 425, 2018 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29465504
13.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(7): 1305, 2017 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28832387
14.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(5): 853, 2017 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28525496
15.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(6): 1059, 2017 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28640174
17.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(2): 195, 2017 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28114229
18.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(4): 627, 2017 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28441248
19.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(8): 1569, 2017 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28885272
20.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(1): 1, 2017 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28002206
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL