TOPLINE:Electronic health record (EHR)–derived family history identified 29,913 patients with familial risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, but 82% had no evidence of genetic testing. Seven-question family history screening (FHS7)–positive status was associated with a threefold increase in BRCA1/2 positivity and a 44% increase in cancer risk among women.
METHODOLOGY:A cross-sectional and retrospective cohort analysis used EHR data from Renown Health in Northern Nevada. The study period spanned from January 1, 2018, to February 1, 2024, with data on demographic variables, healthcare utilization, and cancer diagnoses.The study aimed to use the FHS7 to identify patients meeting family history criteria for genetic testing (familial risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer) in their EHRs; patients meeting the FHS7 criteria were deemed to be FHS7–positive.A total of 835,727 patients aged 18-79 years were included, with genotype data available for 38,003 participants from the Healthy Nevada Project, which notified 330 individuals with BRCA1/2 variants of their genetic risk.The primary outcomes were the presence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in specific genes and the diagnosis of cancer.TAKEAWAY:FHS7–positive status was associated with a 3.34-fold increase in BRCA1/2 positivity among female participants and a 3.35-fold increase among male participants (95% CI, 2.48-4.47 and 1.93-5.56, respectively).Female FHS7–positive participants had a 1.62-fold increase in CHEK2 positivity and a 2.84-fold increase in PALB2 positivity (95% CI, 1.05-2.43 and 1.23-6.16, respectively).Age-adjusted cancer incidence rates were higher for FHS7–positive patients, with 367.2 cases per 100,000 per year for women and 309.9 cases per 100,000 per year for men.The number needed to test to detect one BRCA1/2–positive patient decreased from 128 to 53 for women and from 119 to 42 for men when prescreening with FHS7.IN PRACTICE:”EHR-derived FHS7 identified thousands of patients with familial risk for breast cancer, indicating a substantial gap in genetic testing,” the study authors wrote. “Survey results suggest that most patients who are FHS7–positive in their EHR truly meet family history criteria, but that EHR-derived FHS7 may miss many patients who would be FHS7–positive if approached with a direct questionnaire,” the author wrote.
SOURCE:The study was led by Daniel Kiser, MS, University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine. It was published online on September 25 in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS: The study’s observational design may introduce self-selection biases, particularly among Healthy Nevada Project participants. The 21.8% response rate to the survey suggests potential self-selection among respondents. The tendency of less healthy patients to have more data available in their EHRs could influence the authors’ analysis of cancer incidence rates, despite adjustments for healthcare utilization levels.
DISCLOSURES:Kiser and Joseph J. Grzymski, PhD, reported holding patents outside the submitted work. Grzymski also disclosed receiving grants from Gilead Sciences. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Source : Medscape