A chart audit at one cancer center, of 193 women with breast cancer, was completed to assess whether a complete family history that may indicate genetic predisposition was obtained and if that information led a provider to suggest risk reduction strategies. A risk management tool, which included a pedigree template, was used. Of the 193 charts reviewed, 88.6% had family history information recorded; 41.5% reported three generations of family history. Risk management was undocumented in 21.8% of the charts reviewed and, for those that were reported (78.2%), 7.25% were referred for genetic counseling. These results suggest that a more detailed assessment of hereditary breast cancer risk incorporating three generations of family history and additional types of cancer need to be integrated into medical oncology practice. An algorithm was developed as a guide to improve the process of evaluation and referral for genetic risk assessment.

6121 Background: In 2002, Kansas City Cancer Center (KCCC) performed a quality improvement (QI) project to evaluate how breast cancer patients were being assessed for family history and cancer risk management. A self-administered family history questionnaire was developed to improve the thoroughness of family history collected and education of clinicians was completed to improve the recognition of risk factors based on ASCO guidelines. Methods: Chart audits on 210 women with breast cancer at KCCC, were completed in the second quarter of 2005. All patients were under the age of 65, not undergoing chemotherapy. A risk management tool was developed. Scoring criteria for 2002 was replicated in 2005 as listed in the table . Results: In 2002, 171 pts (89%) had level 1 or 2 family history assessed compared to 207 pts (99%) in 2005, p<0.0001. In 2002, 47% had 3 generations assessed compared to 84% in 2005, p<0.0001. In 2002 and 2005, some risk factor management occurred in both groups, and was equal, 78% and 80% respectively (p=ns). Of those that had risk management 33% had level 1 in 2002 compared to 3% in 2005 (p<0.0001) a 91% reduction in identifying risk without subsequent management. In 2002, 58% had level 2, compared to 71% in 2005 (p=0.02) a 23% improvement in identification & management of risk. In 2002, 9% had level 3 compared to 26% in 2005 (p<0.0001) a 183% improvement in patients with a detailed risk assessment and/or genetic referral. Conclusions: By improving the assessment of family history and education of providers, women with breast cancer are receiving more information to reduce their risk for recurrence and complications. Patients who were identified as high risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations were referred to either a nurse practitioner or genetic counselor. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract