↓ Skip to main content

Randomized trial of proactive rapid genetic counseling versus usual care for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Randomized trial of proactive rapid genetic counseling versus usual care for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10549-018-4773-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc D. Schwartz, Beth N. Peshkin, Claudine Isaacs, Shawna Willey, Heiddis B. Valdimarsdottir, Rachel Nusbaum, Gillian Hooker, Suzanne O’Neill, Lina Jandorf, Scott P. Kelly, Jessica Heinzmann, Aliza Zidell, Katia Khoury

Abstract

Breast cancer patients who carry BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutations may consider bilateral mastectomy. Having bilateral mastectomy at the time of diagnosis not only reduces risk of a contralateral breast cancer, but can eliminate the need for radiation therapy and yield improved reconstruction options. However, most patients do not receive genetic counseling or testing at the time of their diagnosis. In this trial, we tested proactive rapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in order to facilitate pre-surgical genetic counseling and testing. We recruited newly diagnosed breast cancer patients at increased risk for carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. Of 379 eligible patients who completed a baseline survey, 330 agreed to randomization in a 2:1 ratio to RGCT (n = 220) versus UC (n = 108). Primary outcomes were genetic counseling and testing uptake and breast cancer surgical decisions. RGCT led to higher overall (83.8% vs. 54.6%; p < 0.0001) and pre-surgical (57.8% vs. 38.7%; p = 0.001) genetic counseling uptake compared to UC. Despite higher rates of genetic counseling, RGCT did not differ from UC in overall (54.1% vs. 49.1%, p > 0.10) or pre-surgical (30.6% vs. 27.4%, p > 0.10) receipt of genetic test results nor did they differ in uptake of bilateral mastectomy (26.6% vs. 21.8%, p > 0.10). Although RGCT yielded increased genetic counseling participation, this did not result in increased rates of pre-surgical genetic testing or impact surgical decisions. These data suggest that those patients most likely to opt for genetic testing at the time of diagnosis are being effectively identified by their surgeons.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 22 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 11%
Engineering 3 4%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 28 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 March 2020.
All research outputs
#14,920,685
of 25,388,229 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,124
of 4,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,115
of 335,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#34
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,388,229 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 335,354 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 66 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 50% of its contemporaries.