Frequency of Genetic Testing Among Patients With Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Peritoneal Cancers: A Strategy to Improve Compliance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: In 2014, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recommended universal germline testing for all patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), fallopian tube cancer (FTC), or peritoneal cancer (PC). Despite this position statement, genetic testing (GT) uptake among affected patients remains well below the universal testing goal. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of an internal policy change on the GT rate at a single institution. Patients and Methods: This investigation was an Institutional Review Board (IRB)–approved (#22‐00711) retrospective cohort study which took place at a single institution from June 2021 to April 2022. The study assessed GT uptake among patients diagnosed with EOC, FTC, and PC to evaluate the following internal policy change integrating point‐of‐care (POC) GT. Results: A total of 272 patients were identified with 47 patients excluded due to nonepithelial tumors. Genetic counseling was documented in 94.2% of eligible patients (212/225) and completed in 90.2% (203/225). Of the 22 (9.8%) who were not genetically tested, 27% (6/22) were offered and declined. Deleterious mutations were identified in 22% (45/205) of patients tested. Of these, 82.2% (37/45) were in BRCA, 6.8% (3/45) in Lynch‐associated mutations (MSH2, MSH6, MLH1, and PMS2), 4.4% (2/45) in RAD51, 4.4% (2/45) in BRIP1, and 2.2% (1/45) in an unknown deleterious mutation reportedly diagnosed at a different facility. Conclusion: Internal policy developed based on analysis of compliance with the SGO position statement and subsequent implementation of POC testing led to a significant increase in GT, indicating improvement in quality medical care. GT rates in this population are markedly higher than reported in the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".