Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep;23(9):1124-8.
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.269. Epub 2015 Jan 7.

Maximising the efficiency of clinical screening programmes: balancing predictive genetic testing with a right not to know

Affiliations

Maximising the efficiency of clinical screening programmes: balancing predictive genetic testing with a right not to know

Agnes G Schuurman et al. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015 Sep.

Abstract

We explored the dilemma between patients' right not to know their genetic status and the efficient use of health-care resources in the form of clinical cancer screening programmes. Currently, in the Netherlands, 50% risk carriers of heritable cancer syndromes who choose not to know their genetic status have access to the same screening programmes as proven mutation carriers. This implies an inefficient use of health-care resources, because half of this group will not carry the familial mutation. At the moment, only a small number of patients are involved; however, the expanding possibilities for genetic risk profiling means this issue must be addressed because of potentially adverse societal and financial impact. The trade-off between patients' right not to know their genetic status and efficient use of health-care resources was discussed in six focus groups with health-care professionals and patients from three Dutch university hospitals. Professionals prefer patients to undergo a predictive DNA test as a prerequisite for entering cancer screening programmes. Professionals prioritise treating sick patients or proven mutation carriers over screening untested individuals. Participation in cancer screening programmes without prior DNA testing is, however, supported by most professionals, as testing is usually delayed and relatively few patients are involved at present. Reducing the number of 50% risk carriers undergoing screening is expected to be achieved by: offering more psychosocial support, explaining the iatrogenic risks of cancer screening, increasing out-of-pocket costs, and offering a less stringent screening programme for 50% risk carriers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Brekelmans CT, Seynaeve C, Bartels CC et al: Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 924–930. - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Healt and Care Excellence (NICE): Familial breast cancer: Classification and care of people at risk of familial breast cancer and management of breast cancer and related risks in people with a family history of breast cancer 2013, http://publications.nice.org.uk/familial-breast-cancer-cg164. - PubMed
    1. Malach M, Baumol WJ: Further opportunities for cost reduction of medical care. J Community Health 2010; 35: 561–571. - PubMed
    1. Lenzer J: Unnecessary care: are doctors in denial and is profit driven healthcare to blame? Br Med J 2012; 345: e6230. - PubMed
    1. Huckman RS, Kelley MA: Public reporting, consumerism, and patient empowerment. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1875–1877. - PubMed