↓ Skip to main content

The Evolution of Cancer Risk Assessment in the Era of Next Generation Sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
The Evolution of Cancer Risk Assessment in the Era of Next Generation Sequencing
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10897-014-9714-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather Fecteau, Kristen J. Vogel, Kristen Hanson, Shannon Morrill‐Cornelius

Abstract

Cancer genetics professionals face a new opportunity and challenge in adapting to the availability of cancer genetic testing panels, now available as a result of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technology. While cancer panels have been available for over a year, we believe that there is not yet enough data to create practice guidelines. Despite this, a year of experience allows us to provide our opinion on points to consider as cancer genetic counselors incorporate this testing technology into genetic counseling practice models. NGS technology offers the ability to potentially diagnose hereditary cancer syndromes more efficiently by testing many genes at once for a fraction of what it would cost to test each gene individually. However, there are limitations and additional risks to consider with these tests. Obtaining informed consent for concurrent testing of multiple genes requires that genetics professionals modify their discussions with patients regarding the potential cancer risks and the associated implications to medical management. We propose dividing the genes on each panel into categories that vary by degree of cancer risk (e.g. penetrance of the syndrome) and availability of management guidelines, with the aim to improve patient understanding of the range of information that can come from this testing. The increased risk for identifying variants of uncertain significance (VUS) when testing many genes at once must be discussed with patients. Pretest genetic counseling must also include the possibility to receive unexpected results as well as the potential to receive a result in the absence of related medical management guidelines. It is also important to consider whether a single gene test remains the best testing option for some patients. As panels expand, it is important that documentation reflects exactly which genes have been analyzed for each patient. While this technology holds the promise of more efficient diagnosis for many of our patients, it also comes with new challenges that we must recognize and address.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 28%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Other 5 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 14 21%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 12%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 April 2014.
All research outputs
#13,914,523
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#649
of 1,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,276
of 227,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.