Recontacting Patients with Updated Genetic Testing Recommendations for Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma and Pheochromocytoma or Paraganglioma

No abstract is available for this paper.

• Publication year

  2018

• Venue

  Annals of Surgical Oncology

• Publication date

  2018-02-09

• Fields of study

  Medicine

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1245/s10434-018-6366-0PMID 29427212PMCID PMC10013431
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Consensus Statement on next-generation-sequencing-based diagnostic testing of hereditary phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas

  2017cited by this paper
• European Society of Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline for long-term follow-up of patients operated on for a phaeochromocytoma or a paraganglioma.

  2016cited by this paper
• Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 2

  2015cited by this paper
• Revised American Thyroid Association Guidelines for the Management of Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma

  2015cited by this paper
• Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline.

  2014cited by this paper
• Exome sequencing identifies MAX mutations as a cause of hereditary pheochromocytoma

  2011cited by this paper
• Parents' Attitudes Toward Pediatric Genetic Testing for Common Disease Risk

  2011cited by this paper
• Genetics and clinical characteristics of hereditary pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas.

  2011cited by this paper
• Affective and cognitive attitudes, uncertainty avoidance and intention to obtain genetic testing: An extension of the Theory of Planned Behaviour

  2011cited by this paper
• Clinical risk factors for malignancy and overall survival in patients with pheochromocytomas and sympathetic paragangliomas: primary tumor size and primary tumor location as prognostic indicators.

  2011cited by this paper
• SDHA is a tumor suppressor gene causing paraganglioma.

  2010cited by this paper
• Germline mutations in TMEM127 confer susceptibility to pheochromocytoma

  2010cited by this paper
• Impact of Event Scale-revised.

  2010cited by this paper
• A current review of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of pediatric pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma.

  2010cited by this paper
• SDH5, a Gene Required for Flavination of Succinate Dehydrogenase, Is Mutated in Paraganglioma

  2009cited by this paper
• A germline mutation of the KIF1Bβ gene on 1p36 in a family with neural and nonneural tumors

  2008cited by this paper
• Should healthcare providers have a duty to warn family members of individuals with an HNPCC-causing mutation? A survey of patients from the Ontario Familial Colon Cancer Registry

  2007cited by this paper
• Patient preferences regarding recontact by cancer genetics clinicians

  2007cited by this paper
• Review: Should patients with apparently sporadic pheochromocytomas or paragangliomas be screened for hereditary syndromes?

  2006cited by this paper
• Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

  2005cited by this paper
• Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer Family Members' Perceptions about the Duty to Inform and Health Professionals' Role in Disseminating Genetic Information

  2005cited by this paper
• Delivering Information about Cancer Genetics via Letter to Patients at Low and Moderate Risk of Familial Cancer: A Pilot Study in Wales

  2004cited by this paper
• Intention to learn results of genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer.

  1999cited by this paper
• Correlates of psychologic distress in colorectal cancer patients undergoing genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer.

  1997cited by this paper
• The influence of psychological distress on use of genetic testing for cancer risk.

  1997cited by this paper
• Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA1 gene testing.

  1997cited by this paper
• The influence of psychological distress on use of genetic testing for cancer risk

  1997cited by this paper
• Genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: awareness and interest among women in the general population.

  1997cited by this paper
• A descriptive study of BRCA1 testing and reactions to disclosure of test results

  1997cited by this paper
• Screening for 185delAG in the Ashkenazim.

  1997cited by this paper
• Attitudes towards cancer predictive testing and transmission of information to the family.

  1996cited by this paper
• BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes.

  1996cited by this paper
• Interest in learning of personal genetic risk for cancer: a general population survey.

  1996cited by this paper
• Interest in genetic testing among first-degree relatives of breast cancer patients.

  1995cited by this paper
• Anticipated uptake and impact of genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families.

  1995cited by this paper
• Women's receptivity to testing for a genetic susceptibility to breast cancer.

  1995cited by this paper
• Attitudes about genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility.

  1994cited by this paper
• Pate v. Threlkel.

  1994cited by this paper
• Interest in genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: cognitive and emotional correlates.

  1993cited by this paper
• Multiple endocrine neoplasia type I.

  1985cited by this paper

• DNA sequencing in oncology: a focus group study on a duty to recontact

  2024cites this paper
• Canadian College of Medical Geneticists: clinical practice advisory document – responsibility to recontact for reinterpretation of clinical genetic testing

  2024cites this paper
• An analysis of the impact of annual cancer genetic testing guideline updates on a past patient population

  2023cites this paper
• Challenges in Improving Genomic Literacy: Results from National and Regional Surveys of Genomic Knowledge, Attitudes, Concerns, and Behaviors

  2022cites this paper
• Patient uptake of updated genetic testing following uninformative BRCA1 and BRCA2 results

  2022cites this paper
• Recontacting non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer patients for germline CHEK2 c.1100del pathogenic variant testing: uptake and patient experiences

  2021cites this paper
• Recontacting registry participants with genetic updates through GenomeConnect, the ClinGen patient registry

  2021cites this paper
• Uptake of genetic counseling and multi‐gene panel testing among women in the Intermountain West with previous negative BRCA1 and BRCA2 results contacted for updated testing

  2021influential citation
• Assessing the relationship between patient preferences for recontact after BRCA1 or BRCA2 genetic testing and their monitoring coping style in a Norwegian sample

  2021influential citation
• Patients with unexplained mismatch repair deficiency are interested in updated genetic testing

  2020cites this paper
• Motivations for pursuing genetic counseling to explore the availability of panel genetic testing: a pilot study.

  2020influential citation
• Men's experiences of recontact about a potential increased risk of prostate cancer due to Lynch Syndrome: “Just another straw on the stack”

  2019cites this paper
• ASO Author Reflections: Informing Patients About New Genetic Testing

  2019cites this paper
• The Responsibility to Recontact Research Participants after Reinterpretation of Genetic and Genomic Research Results.

  2019cites this paper
• Recontacting patients for multigene panel testing in hereditary cancer: Efficacy and insights

  2019influential citation
• Attitudes Toward Updated Genetic Testing Among Patients with Unexplained Mismatch Repair Deficiency

  2018cites this paper
• Recontacting patients in clinical genetics services European Society of Human Genetics

  2018cites this paper
• European Society of Human Genetics (2018). Recontacting patients in clinical genetics services: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. European Journal of Human Genetics .

  2018cites this paper
• Recontacting patients in clinical genetics services: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics

  2018cites this paper