Evaluation of healthcare management issues in the provision of clinical services for familial breast/ovarian cancer
Abstract
Despite there being pragmatic national guidelines for assigning risk
to women with a family history of breast cancer, the evidence base
is still sparse. There are three major questions: First, how can an
assignment of "low" risk be made most efficiently? Second, what
are the actual outcomes for higher-risk women enrolled in special
surveillance programmes? Third, what are the costs and benefits of
current management of members of breast cancer families?
My thesis reviews the evolution of clinical services for familial
breast cancer and the existing literature in the field. I describe
the gathering of information from the service records of the Tayside
Breast Cancer Family History Clinic and from specific research
exercises that involved collaboration with other centres in the UK
and abroad. My findings are as follows:
1. Histories provided by the families are not sufficient to assign
risk accurately. They must be extended and verified from other
records by clinical geneticists. Women assigned a low risk can be
informed by post, but some may require further support. The 2004
NICE guidelines for assigning risk are fairly accurate, but may
under-estimate it for some women aged 45--55 years.
2. Annual screening of young women at increased risk results in
detection of most cancers at a curable stage. Women who carry BRCA1
mutations fare less well, even when tumours are detected at an apparently early stage.
3. Costs of accurate risk assessment are outweighed by savings from
the better targeting of surveillance programmes. Early cancer
detection in young women enrolled in these programmes achieves a
substantial gain in life expectancy at a cost of £3,700 per
quality adjusted life year (QALY). Prophylactic surgery for carriers
of BRCA1 mutations is highly cost-effective.
The thesis concludes with a discussion as to how these findings might
be extended and clinical practice improved in the future.
Type
Thesis, PhD Doctor of Philosophy
Rights
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
Description
Electronic version does not contain associated previously published materialCollections
Except where otherwise noted within the work, this item's licence for re-use is described as Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.