To view the fulltext, please log in
To view the pdf, please log in
Background: Breast cancer family clinics provide risk information as one of their key functions. Many referrals to these clinics are ‘low-risk’ women. Objective: It was the aim of this study to report on the generic risk status letters and printed materials (in the form of leaflets) provided to this category of counselees by UK cancer genetics centres. Methods: A postal survey was conducted requesting information materials from genetic centres. Results: Personalized risk letters and/or printed materials were received from 16 of 22 familial cancer centres in the UK. Personalized risk letters and printed materials currently provided to these counselees display inconsistencies and over-simplification that may lead to misunderstanding. Conclusion: There is a need for collaboration among cancer genetics centres to design more helpful and consistent literature.
Copyright / Drug Dosage
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
- Breast cancer. Accessed at http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/aboutcancer/specificcancers/breastcancer?version=2.
- Brewster DH, Fordyce A, Black RJ, The Scottish Clinical Geneticists: Impact of a cancer registry-based genealogy service to support clinical genetics services. Fam Cancer 2004;3:139–141.
- Brain K, Gray J, Norman P, Parsons E, Clarke A, Rogers C, Mansel R, Harper P: Why do women attend familial breast cancer clinics? J Med Genet 2000;37:197–202.
- Wonderling D, Hopwood P, Cull A, Douglas F, Watson M, Burn J, McPherson K: A descriptive study of UK cancer genetics services: an emerging clinical response to the new genetics. Br J Cancer 2001;85:166–170.
- National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Familial breast cancer. Report No: clinical guideline 14. London, National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2004.
- Breast cancer in women: a national clinical guideline. Report No 29. Edinburgh, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 1998.
- Holloway S, Porteous M, Cetnarskyj R, Anderson E, Rush R, Fry A, Gorman D, Steel M, Campbell H: Patient satisfaction with two different models of cancer genetic services in south-east Scotland. Br J Cancer 2004;90:582–589.
- How many women get breast cancer. 2004. Accessed at http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_2_1X_How_many_people_get_breast_cancer_5.asp?sitearea =.
- Familial aspects of cancer: a guide to clinical practice. Canberra, The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, 1999.
- Advice about familial aspects of breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Camperdown NSW, National Breast Cancer Centre, 2000.
- Rothman AJ, Kiviniemi MT: Treating people with information: an analysis and review of approaches to communicating health risk information. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999;25:44–51.
- Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer: Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 2001;358:1389–1399.
- Sacchini V, Bassi F, Gatzemeier W: DCIS and LCIS – surgical options; in Dixon JM (ed): Breast Cancer: Diagnosis and Management. Amsterdam, Elsevier Science, 2000, pp 121–132.
- Ogedegbe G, Cassells AN, Robinson CM, DuHamel K, Tobin JN, Sox CH, Dietrich AJ: Perceptions of barriers and facilitators of cancer early detection among low-income minority women in community health centers. J Natl Med Assoc 2005;97:162–170.
- Dominick KL, Skinner CS, Bastian LA, Bosworth HB, Strigo TS, Rimer BK: Provider characteristics and mammography recommendation among women in their 40s and 50s. J Womens Health 2003;12:61–71.
- Friedman LC, Webb JA, Richards CS, Plon SE: Psychological and behavioral factors associated with colorectal cancer screening among Ashkenazim. Prev Med 1999;29:119–125.