Recording, Interpreting, and Updating the Family History of Cancer

Acheson, Louise S.

doi:10.1001/jama.2011.980

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, guideline-based recommendations for average-risk individuals include options of stool-based testing repeated yearly or colonoscopy every 10 years (if results are normal). In contrast, some individuals with elevated risk should only choose colonoscopy and may need to undergo the procedure at an earlier age or more often than their average-risk counterparts(6;7). However, delivery of risk-tailored recommendations is not easy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Skinner

Halm

Bishop

et al. 2015

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is effective but underused. Guidelines for which tests are recommended and at what intervals depend on specific risks. We developed a tablet-based Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) that asks questions about risk prior to appointments and generates tailored printouts for patients and physicians summarizing and matching risk factors with guideline-based recommendations. Methods Randomized controlled trial among patients who: (1) used CRIS and they and their physicians received tailored printouts; (2) used CRIS to answer questions but received standard information about cancer screening while their physicians received a standard electronic chart prompt indicating they were age-eligible but not currently adherent for CRC screening; or (3) comprised a no-contact group that neither used CRIS nor received any information while their physicians received the standard prompt. Participation in testing was assessed via electronic medical record at 12 months. Results Participation in any CRC testing was three times higher for those who used the CRIS and received any printed materials, compared to no-contact controls (47% v. 16%; p < 0.0001). Among CRIS users ages 50 and older, participation in any testing was higher in the tailored group (53% v. 44%, p=0.023). Conclusion Use of CRIS and receipt of any information facilitated participation in testing. There was more testing participation in the CRIS-tailored than nontailored group. Impact Asking patients questions about their specific risk factors and giving them and their providers’ information just prior to an appointment may increase participation in CRC testing. Tailoring the information has some added benefit.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Skinner

Halm

Bishop

et al. 2015

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…58 Moreover, intensified screening would result in more false positives, detection of lesions that will never become clinically important, and complications from confirmatory testing. 59 How should the family history evolve in the 21st century?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The family history: the first genetic test, and still useful after all those years?

Pyeritz

2012

Genetics in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, with advancements in genetics and familial cancers, it is becoming increasingly important to record family history, the self-report of which is fairly sensitive and specific (23). A very recent editorial (24) discussed the importance of collecting standardized information on family history of cancer and then updating it consistently every 5-10 years for patients between the ages of 30 and 60 (25). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between documented family history of cancer and screening for breast and colorectal cancer

Carney

O’Malley

Gough

et al. 2013

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To examine whether patients with a documented family history of breast or colorectal cancer, either positive or negative, were more likely to receive breast or colorectal cancer screening services than those with no documentation. Methods Medical record reviews were conducted on 3,433 patients aged 55 and older from four primary care practices in two rural Oregon communities. Data collected included patient demographic and risk information and receipt of screening mammography and/or one of four modalities to screen for colorectal cancer. Results Mammography and colorectal cancer screening rates were low in these rural communities, with 50% of average risk women being up-to-date for mammography and 37% of women and 38% of men being up-to-date for colorectal cancer screening according to their risk level. A positive family breast cancer history was associated with an increased likelihood of being up-to-date for mammography screening (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.45-3.00 relative to a recorded negative history). A positive family history for colorectal cancer was associated with an increased likelihood of being up-to-date with colorectal cancer screening according to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) low risk guidelines for males (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.15-7.29) and females (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.32-4.64) relative to a recorded negative family history. Forty-four percent of the charts of female patients and 56% of the charts of male patients contained no documentation of a family cancer history having been taken. The absence of any recorded family cancer history was associated with a decreased likelihood of being up-to-date for mammography screening (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.88 relative to recorded negative history) or for colorectal cancer screening OR 0.75, 95% CI 060-0.96 in females, 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.88 in males relative to recorded negative history). Conclusion Recording family history of cancer was associated with up-to-date cancer screening, even if the family history was negative. Establishing clinical routines to obtain family history could improve appropriate use of cancer screening.

show abstract

Recording, Interpreting, and Updating the Family History of Cancer

Cited by 19 publications

References 24 publications

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Impact of Risk Assessment and Tailored versus Nontailored Risk Information on Colorectal Cancer Testing in Primary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The family history: the first genetic test, and still useful after all those years?

Association between documented family history of cancer and screening for breast and colorectal cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About