Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40042150›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2025

Breast Cancer Genetic Services in a South African Setting: Proband Testing, Cascading and Clinical Management.

T S Osler, M Schoeman, J Edge, W J S Pretorius, F H Rabe, C G Mathew, M F Urban

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

T S OslerSydney Brenner Institute for Molecular Bioscience, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2966-6327
M SchoemanDivision of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Stellenbosch and Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
J EdgeDepartment of Surgery, Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital and University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
W J S PretoriusDivision of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Stellenbosch and Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
F H RabeFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Stellenbosch and Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
C G MathewSydney Brenner Institute for Molecular Bioscience, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
M F UrbanDivision of Human Genetics, National Health Laboratory Service and School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

Cancer Association of South Africa S007773Science for Africa Foundation Del-22-008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLimited data exist on managing hereditary breast cancer in low- middle-income countries (LMICs). We assessed proband and cascade genetic testing, and risk-reducing measures in a South African regional breast cancer service.

methodsWe analysed records from 534 consecutive female probands receiving genetic counselling for breast cancer and their 115 relatives who attended genetic counselling. Demographic and clinical data, family pedigrees and genetic test data were collated from hospital clinical records, regional laboratory data, screening appointments and radiological records.

resultsTest uptake in probands was high (86.9%), although cost was a deterrent in some. There were 83 (19.6%) probands who tested positive, and 45.0% of them had one or more family members have testing. This resulted in 9.2% of relatives (first- to third-degree) having cascade testing. Family testing was associated with a stronger family history of cancer, female gender and being a first-degree relative (uptake was 25.6% in female first-degree relatives). Risk-reducing mastectomy was accepted by 52.6% of eligible female family members, while mammographic surveillance (30%) and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (15.4%) were less frequent.

conclusionGenetic testing was well accepted by probands, but uptake was low in family members. Overall, one family member carrying a pathogenic variant was identified for every 13 probands receiving genetic counselling and for every 11 probands tested. Risk-reducing measures were taken up by over half of those eligible. Limited uptake of cascade testing and variable uptake of risk-reducing options impacted the programme. To our knowledge, this is the first study in Africa of the real-world effectiveness of a breast cancer genetic service.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsGenetic ServicesGenetic TestingAdultAgedEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMammographyMiddle AgedPedigreeSouth AfricaBRCA1/2cancer preventioncascade testinggenetic testing

Identifiers

PMID40042150
PMCPMC11881015

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.