Identifying Red Flags and Patterns that Increase Cancer Risk

Original Release: April 24, 2014
Renewal Date: April 23, 2020
Expiration Date: June 30, 2023

Learning Objectives

• Analyze family history to guide evaluation of cancer risk
• Identify red flags to help determine risk level
• Communicate genomic information in a patient-centered way

Target Audience
Practicing primary care providers as well as students and residents.

Accreditation
This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the accreditation requirements and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint providership of the University of Connecticut School of Medicine and The Jackson Laboratory. The University of Connecticut School of Medicine is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

The University of Connecticut School of Medicine designates this enduring material for a maximum of .25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

• Emily Edelman, MS, CGC – The Jackson Laboratory
• Hayley Dunnack, MS, RN, CMSRN, OCN – Hartford Hospital
• Therese Ingram, MA – The Jackson Laboratory
• Aman Mann, MS, CGC – Northwell Health
• Kate Reed, MPH, ScM, CGC – The Jackson Laboratory
• Linda Steinmark, MS, CGC – The Jackson Laboratory

Conflict of Interest Policy
All faculty members participating in CME activities sponsored by the University of Connecticut School of Medicine are required to disclose to the program audience any actual or apparent conflict of interest related to the content of their presentations. Program planners have an obligation to resolve any actual conflicts of interest and share with the audience any safeguards put in place to prevent commercial bias from influencing the content. 

Disclosure
Unless otherwise noted, the program planners and faculty do not have a financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organizations that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest in the context of the subject of this course. The following disclosures are reported that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest in the education program: Emily Edelman and Kate Reed received salary support from Pfizer Inc. through an unrestricted quality improvement grant that focuses on improving ascertainment of hereditary breast cancer, provided by the American Community Cancer Centers and Pfizer Independent Grants for Learning & Change. In their roles as planners and content authors, Ms. Edelman and Ms. Reed recused themselves from all deliberations relating to content related to the commercial entity with which they have a financial interest and were not responsible for reviewing for bias any related content. All educational material has been peer-reviewed by external reviewers to assess for bias.

Actors are being used in this program and are presenting information that has been scripted for them. They were not involved with the educational content of this activity. The program does not discuss the off-labeled use of any product.

Commercial Support
An earlier version of this program was supported by educational grants from The Maine Cancer Foundation and The Jackson Laboratory Director's Innovation Fund. There is no commercial support being received for this activity.

References

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 478: Family History as a Risk Assessment Tool. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011; 117(3):747-750.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 793: Hereditary Cancer Syndromes and Risk Assessment. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2019; 134(6):e143-e149.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 147: Lynch Syndrome. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2014; 124(5):1042-1054.

Hampel H, Bennett RL, Buchanan A, Pearlman R, Wiesner GL. A practice guideline from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors: referral indications for cancer predisposition assessment. Genet Med. 2014; 17(1):70-87.

Lundy MG, Forman A, Valverde K, Kessler L. An Investigation of Genetic Counselors’ Testing Recommendations: Pedigree Analysis and the Use of Multiplex Breast Cancer Panel Testing. J Genet Counsel. 2014; 23(4):618-632.

Moyer VA. Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer in Women: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160(4):271-281-.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Guidelines for Detection, Prevention and Risk Reduction. (Requires free registration).

Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, et al. Cancer Screening in the United States, 2018: A Review of Current American Cancer Society Guidelines and Current Issues in Cancer Screening. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2018; 68(4):297-316.