Highlights
- •Interest in population-based BRCA screening was high among a diverse, unselected population.
- •Willingness to pay out of pocket was associated with interest in testing.
- •Awareness of BRCA testing is poor among Black and Hispanic women when compared to White and non-Hispanic women.
Abstract
Objective
To evaluate awareness and acceptability of population-based BRCA testing among an unselected population of women presenting for annual gynecologic
health assessment, with secondary objective to determine if a racial disparity exists
in acceptability and awareness of this screening strategy.
Methods
Women presenting for routine gynecologic care in an outpatient setting of a single
academic institution were anonymously surveyed. Survey collected age, self-identified
race and ethnicity, education level, personal and family history of breast and/or
ovarian cancer (BOC), awareness and interest, and willingness to pay out of pocket
for testing. Responses were compared with bivariate and multivariate analysis.
Results
Interest in testing was expressed in 150 of 301 (45.1%) of participants. Women with
a family history of BOC were more likely to be interested in testing than those without
(OR = 1.9 (1.0–3.6)). Interest in testing was associated willingness to pay (OR = 3.3
(1.7–6.4)). Higher education level was associated with awareness of testing (OR = 9.9
(2.0–49.7)). Interest in testing was similar between racial groups, but awareness
and willingness to pay for testing were higher among White women. Multivariate analysis
with adjustment for education level confirmed that Black and Hispanic women were less
likely to have awareness of genetic testing compared to White women and non-Hispanic
Women, respectively (OR = 0.11 (0.05–0.3); OR = 0.10 (0.01–0.8)).
Conclusions
Interest in genetic testing among women in the general population is high. Despite
interest, awareness of BRCA is poor among Black and Hispanic women even when adjusting for education level.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Gynecologic OncologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Cancer statistics, 2017.CA Cancer J. Clin. 2017; 67: 7-30
- Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2016; 387: 945-956
- Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial.JAMA. 2011; 305: 2295-2303
- Long-term survival of women with epithelial ovarian cancer detected by ultrasonographic screening.Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 118: 1212-1221
- A randomized study of screening for ovarian cancer: a multicenter study in Japan.Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. 2008; 18: 414-420
- Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality.JAMA. 2010; 304: 967-975
- Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.J. Clin. Oncol. 2014; 32: 1547-1553
- Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in patients with germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2.J. Clin. Oncol. 2007; 25: 2921-2927
- Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.Ann. Intern. Med. 2014; 160: 271-281
- Cascade testing: testing women for known hereditary genetic mutations associated with cancer. ACOG committee opinion no. 727.Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 2018; 73: 211-212
- National estimates of genetic testing in women with a history of breast or ovarian cancer.J. Clin. Oncol. 2017; 35: 3800-3806
- Genetic testing and results in a population-based cohort of breast cancer patients and ovarian cancer patients.J. Clin. Oncol. 2019; 37: 1305-1315
- Underutilization of BRCA1/2 testing to guide breast cancer treatment: black and Hispanic women particularly at risk.Genet Med. 2011; 13: 349-355
- Barriers to the use of genetic testing: a study of racial and ethnic disparities.Genet Med. 2009; 11: 655-662
- The association between race and attitudes about predictive genetic testing.Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2004; 13: 361-365
- Population-based screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2: 2014 Lasker Award.JAMA. 2014; 312: 1091-1092
- What Black women know and want to know about counseling and testing for BRCA1/2.J. Cancer Educ. 2015; 30: 344-352
- Population based testing for primary prevention: a systematic review.Cancers (Basel). 2018; 10
- Characteristics of women with ovarian carcinoma who have BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations not identified by clinical testing.Gynecol. Oncol. 2013; 128: 483-487
- Population screening for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations: lessons from qualitative analysis of the screening experience.Genet Med. 2017; 19: 628-634
- Patient satisfaction and cancer-related distress among unselected Jewish women undergoing genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2.Clin. Genet. 2010; 78: 411-417
- Cost-effectiveness of population based BRCA testing with varying Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry.Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 217 (e1-e12): 578
- A comparison of the detection of BRCA mutation carriers through the provision of Jewish population-based genetic testing compared with clinic-based genetic testing.Br. J. Cancer. 2013; 109: 777-779
- Impact of a decision aid about stratified ovarian cancer risk-management on women's knowledge and intentions: a randomised online experimental survey study.BMC Public Health. 2017; 17: 882
- Perceiving cancer-risks and heredity-likelihood in genetic-counseling: how counselees recall and interpret BRCA 1/2-test results.Clin. Genet. 2011; 79: 207-218
- Global trends on fears and concerns of genetic discrimination: a systematic literature review.J. Hum. Genet. 2016; 61: 275-282
- Genetic testing across young Hispanic and non-Hispanic white breast cancer survivors: facilitators, barriers, and awareness of the genetic information nondiscrimination act.Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2019; 23: 75-83
- Genetic testing in a population-based sample of breast and ovarian cancer survivors from the REACH randomized trial: cost barriers and moderators of counseling mode.Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers. 2017; 26: 1772-1780
- Psychosocial predictors of BRCA counseling and testing decisions among urban African-American women.Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2002; 11: 1579-1585
- Disparities in gynecologic cancer genetics evaluation.Gynecol. Oncol. 2019; : 184-191https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.01.024
- Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer.JAMA. 2005; 293: 1729-1736
- Increased uptake of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among African American women with a recent diagnosis of breast cancer.J. Clin. Oncol. 2008; 26: 32-36
- African American women's limited knowledge and experiences with genetic counseling for hereditary breast cancer.J. Genet. Couns. 2014; 23: 311-322
- BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in medically underserved medicare beneficiaries with breast or ovarian cancer BRCA1/2 testing in medically underserved women with breast or ovarian CancerLetters.JAMA. 2018; 320: 597-598
- Disparities in genetics assessment for women with ovarian cancer: can we do better?.Gynecol. Oncol. 2018; 149: 84-88
- Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities.Obstet. Gynecol. 2010; 115: 945-952
- Family communication of BRCA1/2 results and family uptake of BRCA1/2 testing in a diverse population of BRCA1/2 carriers.J. Genet. Couns. 2013; 22: 603-612
Article info
Publication history
Published online: June 22, 2019
Accepted:
June 6,
2019
Received in revised form:
June 4,
2019
Received:
March 15,
2019
Identification
Copyright
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
