Accès gratuit
Numéro
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 27, Numéro 6-7, Juin–Juillet 2011
Page(s) 657 - 661
Section Forum
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2011276019
Publié en ligne 1 juillet 2011
  1. Sevilla C, Bourret P, Noguès C, et al. L’offre de tests de prédisposition génétique au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire en France. Med Sci (Paris) 2004 ; 20 : 788-792. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Inca. Rapport d’activité d’oncogénétique 2009-2010. Paris. Intitut National du Cancer, 2010 : 54. [Google Scholar]
  3. Eisinger F, Bressac B, Castaigne D, et al. Identification and management of hereditary predisposition to cancer of the breast and the ovary (update 2004). Bull Cancer 2004 ; 91 : 219-237. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bast RC Jr, Mills GB. Personalizing therapy for ovarian cancer : BRCAness and beyond. J Clin Oncol 2011 ; 28 : 3545-3548. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Van Dijk S, Otten W, Timmermans DR, et al. What’s the message? Interpretation of an uninformative BRCA1/2 test result for women at risk of familial breast cancer. Genet Med 2005 ; 7 : 239-245. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cypowyj C, Eisinger F, Huiart L, et al. Subjective interpretation of inconclusive BRCA1/2 cancer genetic test results and transmission of information to the relatives. Psychooncology 2009 ; 18 : 209-215. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hallowell N, Foster C, Ardern-Jones A, et al. Genetic testing for women previously diagnosed with breast/ovarian cancer : examining the impact of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation searching. Genet Test 2002 ; 6 : 79-87. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Inserm. Test génétiques : questions scientifiques, médicales et sociétales. Collection Expertises collectives. Paris : Inserm, 2008 : 352 p. [Google Scholar]
  9. Julian-Reynier C, Pierret J, Eisinger F. Prédisposition génétique au cancer : questions psychologiques et débats de société, Paris : John Libbey Eurotext, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  10. Julian-Reynier C, Welkenhuysen M, Hagoel L, et al. Risk communication strategies : state of the art and effectiveness in the context of cancer genetic services. Eur J Hum Genet 2003 ; 11 : 725-736. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. Risk charts : putting cancer in context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002 ; 94 : 799-804. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Braithwaite D, Emery J, Walter F, et al. Psychological impact of genetic counseling for familial cancer : a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004 ; 96 : 122-133. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Heshka JT, Palleschi C, Howley H, et al. A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing. Genet Med 2008 ; 10 : 19-32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hopwood P. Psychosocial aspects of risk communication and mutation testing in familial breast-ovarian cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2005 ; 17 : 340-344. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Meiser B, Halliday JL. What is the impact of genetic counselling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer? A meta-analytic review. Soc Sci Med 2002 ; 54 : 1463-1470. [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [MathSciNet] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Julian-Reynier C, Bouhnik AD, Mouret-Fourme E, et al. Time to prophylactic surgery in BRCA1/2 carriers depends on psychological and other characteristics. Genet Med 2010 ; 12 : 801-807. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Bonaïti-Pellié C, Andrieu N, Arveux P, et al. Cancer genetics : estimation of the needs of the population in France for the next ten years. Bull Cancer 2009 ; 96 : 875-900. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Bouhnik A. Psychological follow-up after disclosure of cancer genetic test results in BRCA1/2 mutated families. Eur J Hum Genet 2010 ; 18S1 : 387. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lodder L, Frets PG, Trijsburg RW, et al. Psychological impact of receiving a BRCA1/BRCA2 test result. Am J Med Genet 2001 ; 98 : 15-24. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Foster C, Watson M, Eeles R, et al. Predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 in a UK clinical cohort : three-year follow-up. Br J Cancer 2007 ; 96 : 718-724. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Julian-Reynier C, Mancini J, Mouret-Fourme E, et al. Cancer risk management strategies and perceptions of unaffected women 5 years after predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Eur J Hum Genet 2011 ; 19 : 500-506. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Schwartz MD. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy : efficacy, satisfaction, and regret. J Clin Oncol 2005 ; 23 : 7777-7779. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lodder LN, Frets PG, Trijsburg RW, et al. One year follow-up of women opting for presymptomatic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 : emotional impact of the test outcome and decisions on risk management (surveillance or prophylactic surgery). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002 ; 73 : 97-112. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Metcalfe KA, Ghadirian P, Rosen B, et al. Variation in rates of uptake of preventive options by Canadian women carrying the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genetic mutation. Open Med 2007 ; 1 : e92-8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Evans DG, Lalloo F, Ashcroft L, et al. Uptake of risk-reducing surgery in unaffected women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer is risk, age, and time dependent. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009 ; 18 : 2318-2324. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Skytte AB, Gerdes AM, Andersen MK, et al. Risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy in unaffected BRCA mutation carriers : uptake and timing. Clin Genet 2010 ; 77 : 342-349. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Julian-Reynier CM, Bouchard LJ, Evans DG, et al. Women’s attitudes toward preventive strategies for hereditary breast or ovarian carcinoma differ from one country to another : differences among English, French, and Canadian women. Cancer 2001 ; 92 : 959-968. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Moatti JP, Sobol H. Physicians’ attitudes towards mammography and prophylactic surgery for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk and subsequently published guidelines. Eur J Hum Genet 2000 ; 8 : 204-208. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Dawson SJ, Price MA, Jenkins MA, et al. Cancer risk management practices of noncarriers within BRCA1/2 mutation positive families in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for research into familial breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008 ; 26 : 225-232. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Dorval M, Noguès C, Berthet P, et al. Breast and ovarian cancer screening of non-carriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families : 2-year follow-up of cohorts from France and Quebec. Eur J Hum Genet 2011 ; 19 : 494-499. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Jordan, B. Les tests génétiques grand public en « caméra cachée ». Med Sci (Paris) 2011 ; 27 : 103-106. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ducournau P, Gourraud PA, Rial-Sebbag E, et al. Tests génétiques en accès libre sur Internet - Stratégies commerciales et enjeux éthiques et sociétaux. Med Sci (Paris) 2011 ; 27 : 95-102. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Matloff ET, Brierley KL. The double-helix derailed : the story of the BRCA patent. Lancet 2010 ; 376 : 314-315. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Cassier M, Stoppa-Lyonnet D. Un juge fédéral et le gouvernement des États-Unis interviennent contre la brevetabilité des gènes. Med Sci (Paris) 2011 ; 27 : 662-666. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Annes J, Giiovanni M, Murray M. Risk of presymptomatic direct-to-consumer genetic testing. N Engl J Med 2010 ; 363 : 1100-1101. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Evans J, Dale D, Fomous C. Preparing for a consumer-driven genomic age. N Engl J Med 2010 ; 363 : 1099-1103. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Manolio TA. Genomewide association studies and assessment of the risk of disease. N Engl J Med 2010 ; 363 : 166-176. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Human Genetics Commission. Genes direct : ensuring the effective oversight of genetic tests supplied directly to the public. London: Department of Health, 2003 : 78. http://www.hgc.gov.uk/Client/ document.asp?DocId=34 [Google Scholar]
  39. Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility : evaluating direct to consumer marketing. Atlanta, Denver, Raleigh-Durham, and Seattle 2003. MMWR 2004 ; 53 : 603-606. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wertz D, Fletcher J. Genetics and ethics in global perspective. Amsterdam : Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Jordan B. Séquence personnelle et tests génétiques : le pavé dans la mare. Med Sci (Paris) 2010 ; 26 : 999-1001. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Becker F, van El CG, Ibarreta D, et al. Genetic testing, common disorders in a public health framework : how to assess relevance, possibilities. Background document to the ESHG recommendations on genetic testing, common disorders. Eur J Hum Genet 2011 ; 19 (suppl 1) : S6-S44. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.