GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: American Journal of Case Reports, International Scientific Information, Inc., Vol. 21 ( 2020-11-06)
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1941-5923
    Language: English
    Publisher: International Scientific Information, Inc.
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2517183-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Frontiers in Oncology, Frontiers Media SA, Vol. 12 ( 2022-8-25)
    Abstract: Genomic profiles of tumors are often unique and represent characteristic mutational signatures defined by DNA damage or DNA repair response processes. The tumor-derived somatic information has been widely used in therapeutic applications, but it is grossly underutilized in the assessment of germline genetic variants. Here, we present a comprehensive approach for evaluating the pathogenicity of germline variants in cancer using an integrated interpretation of somatic and germline genomic data. We have previously demonstrated the utility of this integrated approach in the reassessment of pathogenic germline variants in selected cancer patients with unexpected or non-syndromic phenotypes. The application of this approach is presented in the assessment of rare variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in Lynch-related colon cancer, hereditary paraganglioma-pheochromocytoma syndrome, and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Using this integrated method, germline VUS in PMS2 , MSH6 , SDHC , SHDA , and TP53 were assessed in 16 cancer patients after genetic evaluation. Comprehensive clinical criteria, somatic signature profiles, and tumor immunohistochemistry were used to re-classify VUS by upgrading or downgrading the variants to likely or unlikely actionable categories, respectively. Going forward, collation of such germline variants and creation of cross-institutional knowledgebase datasets that include integrated somatic and germline data will be crucial for the assessment of these variants in a larger cancer cohort.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2234-943X
    Language: Unknown
    Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2649216-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Elsevier BV ; 2019
    In:  Fertility and Sterility Vol. 112, No. 3 ( 2019-09), p. e352-
    In: Fertility and Sterility, Elsevier BV, Vol. 112, No. 3 ( 2019-09), p. e352-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0015-0282
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1500469-7
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), Vol. 81, No. 4_Supplement ( 2021-02-15), p. OT-20-01-OT-20-01
    Abstract: Background: There is evidence that increases in germline cancer genetic testing result in higher rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in newly diagnosed breast cancer (BC) patients, even among those with negative results. Unlike carriers of BRCA pathogenic variants (PV), the risks of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and benefits of CPM for women with PV in moderate penetrance genes are not well studied. There is a critical need to determine how to best counsel BC patients about their personal CBC risk and surgical decisions. Trial design: Newly diagnosed BC patients are randomized 1:1 to quantitative or standard post-genetic test cancer risk counseling methods by genetic counselors. Quantitative counseling includes personalized CBC risk estimates. For patients with a PV in a BC risk gene, CBC risk estimates are calculated via the “ASK2ME” decision tool (https://ask2me.org/). For those without a BC-associated PV, CBC risk estimates are calculated via a validated model “CBCRisk” (https://cbc-predictor-utd.shinyapps.io/CBCRisk/).Standard counseling does not typically include specific CBC risk estimates.Eligibility criteria: All patients over 18 with newly diagnosed invasive or in situ unilateral BC considering genetic testing at Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center are eligible. Exclusion criteria include a diagnosis of previous BC, metastatic or bilateral BC, hematologic malignancy, prior or active other malignancy, prior multi-gene panel testing, known medical or surgical contraindication to surgery and/or CPM.Specific aims: The primary aims are to 1) compare changes in patients’ personal CBC risk assessment before/after quantitative versus standard counseling; 2) determine changes in patients’ propensity to choose CPM before/after quantitative versus standard counseling. The secondary aims are to: 1) compare CPM rates; 2) determine concordance between patient and surgeon assessment of CBC risk; 3) evaluate patient genetic testing satisfaction via the Genetic Testing Satisfaction Survey administered post-counseling; 4) measure patient anxiety via the PROMIS Anxiety Survey administered pre- and post-counseling, at 6 months and 2 years; and 5) measure patient decisional regret for both undergoing genetic testing and their surgery choices at 6 months and 2 years; all by quantitative versus standard counseling arms. Statistical methods: For aim 1, the difference between patients’ reported personal CBC risk and true risk before and after counseling will be determined. True risk will be based on the ASK2ME/CBCRisk estimates. We hypothesize that the difference between the true and estimated risk will be smaller post-counseling, and smaller in the quantitative counseling versus standard arm. Assuming an expected difference of 5% and expected standard deviation of 20%, 199 patients are needed for each arm to achieve 80% power and type I error of 5% (based on a two-sample t-test). For aim 2, to determine propensity to undergo CPM, patient responses will be assigned a numeric value: Very Unlikely (1), Somewhat unlikely (2), Unsure (3), Somewhat likely (4), Very likely (5). For each patient we will then calculate the difference in scores before/after counseling. Our hypothesis is that differences will be greater in the quantitative arm. Assuming an expected difference of 0.8 and expected standard deviation of 3, 175 patients are needed for each arm to achieve 80% power and type I error rate of 5% (based on a two-sample t-test). Accrual: Recruitment began on June 8, 2020; there are currently 9 of the target 450 patients enrolled. Funding Support: Sponsored Research Agreement with Myriad Laboratories, Inc. and a Brigham and Women’s Hospital Department of Surgery Robert T. Osteen Junior Fellowship Award. PI: Anna Weiss, aweiss5@bwh.harvard.edu, @DrAnnaWeiss Citation Format: Anna Weiss, Danielle Braun, Jill Stopfer, Daniel Desantis, Meaghan Dwan, Dillon Davis, Anjali Jha, Laura Dominici, Shoshana Rosenberg, Tari A. King, Elizabeth A Mittendorf, Mehra Golshan, Huma Q Rana, Judy E Garber. Genetic testing for all breast cancer patients (get facts) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT-20-01.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0008-5472 , 1538-7445
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2036785-5
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1432-1
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 410466-3
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...