• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

绘制画像:对国家癌症遗传咨询健康调查数据的分析。

Painting a portrait: Analysis of national health survey data for cancer genetic counseling.

机构信息

Center for Clinical Genetics and Genomics, Providence St. Joseph Health, Los Angeles, California.

Division of Genetics, Providence John Wayne Cancer Institute, Santa Monica, California.

出版信息

Cancer Med. 2019 Mar;8(3):1306-1314. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1864. Epub 2019 Feb 7.

DOI:10.1002/cam4.1864
PMID:30734520
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6434212/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite a growing body of literature describing the geographic and sociodemographic distribution of cancer genetic testing, work focused on these domains in cancer genetic counseling is limited. Research describing the epidemiology of cancer genetic counseling has mainly focused on isolated populations, a single gender (women) and a single condition (hereditary breast and ovarian cancer). Study findings to date are contradictory, making it unclear what, if any, disparities in receipt of cancer genetic counseling exist.

METHODS

Utilizing the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS)-a cross-sectional, in person interview survey collecting self-reported health data for the US population-geographic and sociodemographic factors were compared between those receiving genetic counseling and the national sample. Bivariate analysis and subsequent multivariable logistic regression were performed with stratification by cancer status (affected/unaffected). Reason for (eg, doctor recommended) and focus of (eg, breast/ovarian) genetic counseling were also assessed. To generate nationally representative estimates, all analyses were adjusted for survey weights.

RESULTS

An estimated 4.8 million individuals in the United States had cancer genetic counseling. On bivariate analysis, there were significant differences in proportions undergoing genetic counseling by sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, citizenship, education, age, and cancer status (P < 0.01). After adjustment, however, only female sex (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.78 [95% CI: 1.18-2.67]) remained a significant predictor of genetic counseling among the affected. Among the unaffected, female sex (OR: 1.70 [1.30-2.21]), non-Hispanic black race (OR: 1.44 [1.02-2.05], reference: non-Hispanic white), graduate education (OR: 1.76 [1.03-2.98], reference: less than high school), and age (OR: 1.06 [1.01-1.11]) predicted higher rates of genetic counseling. An estimated 2.1 million individuals have undergone genetic counseling focused on breast/ovarian cancer, 1.3 million on colorectal cancer, and 1.4 million on "other" cancers. Of those receiving genetic counseling focused on breast/ovarian cancer, 3% were male and 97% female (breast cancer alone-4% male, 96% female); for colorectal cancer, 49% male and 51% female, and for "other" cancers, 60% male and 40% female. The majority of individuals receiving genetic counseling reported they did so because their doctor recommended it (66%), with smaller proportions describing self (12%), family (10%), or media (5%) influences as the primary reason.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to depict the sociodemographic and geographic distribution of cancer genetic counseling at the national level. Despite perceived disparities in access, cancer genetic counseling in the United States appears to be accessed by individuals of diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds, with various insurance coverage and educational levels, and across a broad range of ages and geographic regions. The only sociodemographic factor that independently predicted receipt of genetic counseling across both the affected and unaffected population was sex. With physician recommendation as the predominant driver for counseling, targeting physician education, and awareness is crucial to utilization.

摘要

背景

尽管越来越多的文献描述了癌症遗传检测的地理和社会人口分布,但在癌症遗传咨询领域的相关工作却很有限。描述癌症遗传咨询流行病学的研究主要集中在孤立的人群、单一的性别(女性)和单一的疾病(遗传性乳腺癌和卵巢癌)上。迄今为止的研究结果相互矛盾,使得是否存在任何差异(如果有的话)接受癌症遗传咨询的情况并不清楚。

方法

利用 2015 年全国健康访谈调查(NHIS)——一项收集美国人口自我报告健康数据的横截面、面对面访谈调查——比较了接受遗传咨询者和全国样本的地理和社会人口统计学因素。采用双变量分析和随后的多变量逻辑回归,并按癌症状况(患病/未患病)进行分层。还评估了(例如,医生推荐)和(例如,乳腺癌/卵巢癌)遗传咨询的原因和重点。为了生成具有全国代表性的估计值,所有分析都根据调查权重进行了调整。

结果

估计有 480 万美国人接受了癌症遗传咨询。在双变量分析中,按性别、种族/民族、保险、公民身份、教育、年龄和癌症状况进行比较,接受遗传咨询的比例存在显著差异(P<0.01)。然而,调整后,只有女性(优势比[OR]:1.78[95%置信区间:1.18-2.67])仍然是患病者接受遗传咨询的显著预测因素。在未患病者中,女性(OR:1.70[1.30-2.21])、非西班牙裔黑人(OR:1.44[1.02-2.05],参考:非西班牙裔白人)、研究生教育(OR:1.76[1.03-2.98],参考:低于高中学历)和年龄(OR:1.06[1.01-1.11])预测更高的遗传咨询率。估计有 210 万人接受了针对乳腺癌/卵巢癌的遗传咨询,130 万人接受了针对结直肠癌的遗传咨询,140 万人接受了“其他”癌症的遗传咨询。在接受针对乳腺癌/卵巢癌的遗传咨询者中,3%为男性,97%为女性(乳腺癌单独治疗-4%为男性,96%为女性);结直肠癌患者中,男性占 49%,女性占 51%,“其他”癌症患者中,男性占 60%,女性占 40%。大多数接受遗传咨询的人表示,他们是因为医生的建议(66%),而比例较小的人表示是因为自己(12%)、家人(10%)或媒体(5%)的影响。

结论

这是第一项描述全国范围内癌症遗传咨询的社会人口统计学和地理分布的研究。尽管在获得机会方面存在差异,但美国的癌症遗传咨询似乎为不同种族/民族背景、各种保险覆盖范围和教育水平的个人提供,并涵盖了广泛的年龄和地理区域。唯一独立预测患病和未患病人群接受遗传咨询的社会人口统计学因素是性别。由于医生的建议是咨询的主要驱动因素,因此针对医生进行教育和提高认识至关重要。

相似文献

1
Painting a portrait: Analysis of national health survey data for cancer genetic counseling.绘制画像:对国家癌症遗传咨询健康调查数据的分析。
Cancer Med. 2019 Mar;8(3):1306-1314. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1864. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
2
Examining cancer screening disparities by race/ethnicity and insurance groups: A comparison of 2008 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data in the United States.检查种族/民族和保险群体的癌症筛查差异:对美国 2008 年和 2018 年国家健康访谈调查(NHIS)数据的比较。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 28;19(2):e0290105. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290105. eCollection 2024.
3
National Trends in Cessation Counseling, Prescription Medication Use, and Associated Costs Among US Adult Cigarette Smokers.美国成年烟民戒烟咨询、处方药物使用及相关费用的全国趋势。
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 May 3;2(5):e194585. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.4585.
4
Factors associated with self-reported STDs: data from a national survey.与自我报告的性传播疾病相关的因素:一项全国性调查的数据
Sex Transm Dis. 1994 Nov-Dec;21(6):303-8. doi: 10.1097/00007435-199411000-00002.
5
Sociodemographic Factors Associated With Using eHealth for Information Seeking in the United States: Cross-Sectional Population-Based Study With 3 Time Points Using Health Information National Trends Survey Data.与美国使用电子健康信息搜索相关的社会人口学因素:基于健康信息全国趋势调查数据的具有 3 个时间点的横断面人口研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Aug 14;26:e54745. doi: 10.2196/54745.
6
Prophylactic Oophorectomy: Reducing the U.S. Death Rate from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. A Continuing Debate.预防性卵巢切除术:降低美国上皮性卵巢癌死亡率。一场持续的争论。
Oncologist. 1996;1(5):326-330.
7
Trends and disparities in the prevalence of physicians' counseling on exercise among the U.S. adult population, 2000-2010.2000 - 2010年美国成年人群体中医生关于运动咨询的患病率趋势及差异
Prev Med. 2017 Jun;99:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.01.015. Epub 2017 Feb 2.
8
Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study.美国医生中报告的遗传咨询或 BRCA1/2 检测转诊情况:基于案例的研究。
Cancer. 2011 Dec 1;117(23):5334-43. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26166. Epub 2011 Jul 25.
9
Pediatric otolaryngologic conditions: Racial and socioeconomic disparities in the United States.儿科耳鼻喉科疾病:美国的种族和社会经济差异
Laryngoscope. 2017 Mar;127(3):746-752. doi: 10.1002/lary.26240. Epub 2016 Sep 7.
10
Genetic counseling, genetic testing, and risk perceptions for breast and colorectal cancer: Results from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey.遗传咨询、基因检测与乳腺癌和结直肠癌风险认知:来自 2015 年全国健康访谈调查的结果。
Prev Med. 2019 Jun;123:12-19. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.02.027. Epub 2019 Feb 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Cultural, demographic, and other non-demographic factors associated with cancer genetic counseling patients' appointment accompaniment preferences in the United States.在美国,与癌症遗传咨询患者预约陪同偏好相关的文化、人口统计学及其他非人口统计学因素。
J Genet Couns. 2025 Apr;34(2):e1942. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1942. Epub 2024 Jul 2.
2
Hereditary Cancer Screening and Outcomes at an Urban Safety-Net Hospital.城市医疗服务机构的遗传性癌症筛查及结果。
JCO Precis Oncol. 2024 Jun;8:e2300699. doi: 10.1200/PO.23.00699.
3
Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs.级联遗传检测在遗传性癌症综合征中的应用:障碍与突破的综述。
Fam Cancer. 2024 Jun;23(2):111-120. doi: 10.1007/s10689-024-00373-4. Epub 2024 Mar 26.
4
Privacy and utility of genetic testing in families with hereditary cancer syndromes living in three countries: the international cascade genetic screening experience.生活在三个国家的遗传性癌症综合征家族中基因检测的隐私与效用:国际级联基因筛查经验
Front Genet. 2023 May 9;14:1109431. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1109431. eCollection 2023.
5
Patient perspectives on risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer risk-reduction: A systematic review of the literature.患者对降低卵巢癌风险的预防性输卵管切除术联合延迟卵巢切除术的看法:文献系统评价。
Gynecol Oncol. 2023 Jun;173:106-113. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.04.006. Epub 2023 Apr 26.
6
Genetic Testing and/or Counseling for Colorectal Cancer by Health Insurance Type.按健康保险类型划分的结直肠癌基因检测和/或咨询
J Pers Med. 2022 Jul 15;12(7):1146. doi: 10.3390/jpm12071146.
7
Uptake of Genetic Testing Among Patients with Cancer At Risk for Lynch Syndrome in the National Health Interview Survey.癌症患者林奇综合征风险人群中基因检测的采用情况。在全国健康访谈调查中。
Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2021 Oct;14(10):927-932. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-21-0073. Epub 2021 Aug 2.
8
Factors Influencing Discussion of Cancer Genetic Testing with Health-Care Providers in a Population-Based Survey.在一项基于人群的调查中,影响与医疗服务提供者讨论癌症基因检测的因素。
Public Health Genomics. 2021;24(3-4):160-170. doi: 10.1159/000515465. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
9
Adaptation and early implementation of the PREdiction model for gene mutations (PREMM™) for lynch syndrome risk assessment in a diverse population.针对林奇综合征风险评估的基因突变 PREdiction 模型(PREMM™)在不同人群中的适应和早期实施。
Fam Cancer. 2022 Apr;21(2):167-180. doi: 10.1007/s10689-021-00243-3. Epub 2021 Mar 23.
10
Gender differences in self-reported family history of cancer: A review and secondary data analysis.性别差异与自我报告的癌症家族史:综述与二次数据分析。
Cancer Med. 2020 Oct;9(20):7772-7780. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3405. Epub 2020 Aug 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Association Between Inherited Germline Mutations in Cancer Predisposition Genes and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer.遗传性癌症易感基因种系突变与胰腺癌风险的关联。
JAMA. 2018 Jun 19;319(23):2401-2409. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.6228.
2
National Distribution of Cancer Genetic Testing in the United States: Evidence for a Gender Disparity in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.美国癌症基因检测的全国分布:遗传性乳腺癌和卵巢癌中存在的性别差异的证据。
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jun 1;4(6):876-879. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0340.
3
Malignant Abnormalities in Male BRCA Mutation Carriers: Results From a Prospectively Screened Cohort.男性 BRCA 基因突变携带者的恶性异常:前瞻性筛查队列的结果。
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Jun 1;4(6):872-874. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0271.
4
Gaps in Receipt of Clinically Indicated Genetic Counseling After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.乳腺癌诊断后临床指征遗传咨询的接受情况存在差距。
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Apr 20;36(12):1218-1224. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.2369. Epub 2018 Mar 12.
5
Male BRCA mutation carriers: clinical characteristics and cancer spectrum.男性 BRCA 基因突变携带者:临床特征和癌症谱。
BMC Cancer. 2018 Feb 13;18(1):179. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4098-y.
6
Provider Discussions of Genetic Tests With U.S. Women at Risk for a BRCA Mutation.医疗机构与美国 BRCA 基因突变风险女性讨论基因检测。
Am J Prev Med. 2018 Feb;54(2):221-228. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.10.015. Epub 2017 Dec 11.
7
National Estimates of Genetic Testing in Women With a History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer.有乳腺癌或卵巢癌病史女性的基因检测全国估计数。
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec 1;35(34):3800-3806. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.73.6314. Epub 2017 Aug 18.
8
Predictors of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among Black women with breast cancer: a population-based study.黑人乳腺癌女性中BRCA1/2基因检测的预测因素:一项基于人群的研究。
Cancer Med. 2017 Jul;6(7):1787-1798. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1120. Epub 2017 Jun 19.
9
Genetic Testing and Counseling Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer .新诊断乳腺癌患者的基因检测与咨询
JAMA. 2017 Feb 7;317(5):531-534. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.16918.
10
Distribution and clinical impact of functional variants in 50,726 whole-exome sequences from the DiscovEHR study.50726 例全外显子组序列中的功能变体的分布和临床影响:DiscovEHR 研究。
Science. 2016 Dec 23;354(6319). doi: 10.1126/science.aaf6814.