Are you Kathryn Myhill?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)3.87 Total impact

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: At present cancer genetics referrals are reactive to individuals asking for a referral and providing a family history thereafter. A previous pilot study in a single General Practice (GP) catchment area in North London showed a 1.5-fold increase in breast cancer risk in the Ashkenazi Jewish population compared with the non-Ashkenazi mixed population. The breast cancer incidence was equal in the Ashkenazim in both pre- and postmenopausal groups. We wanted to investigate the effect of proactively seeking family history data from the entire female population of the practice to determine the effect on cancer genetics referral. Objectives To determine the need for cancer genetics intervention for women in a single GP catchment area. (1) to determine the incidence and strength of family history of cancer in women aged over 18 in the practice, (2) to offer cancer genetics advice and determine the uptake of counselling in those with a positive family history, (3) to identify potential BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutation carriers who can be offered clinical follow up with appropriate translational research studies. Design Population-based cohort study of one General Practice female population. Participants Three hundred and eighty-three women over the age of 18 from one General Practice who responded to a questionnaire about family history of cancer. The whole female adult GP population was the target and the total number sampled was 3,820. Results 10% of patients completed the questionnaire (n = 383). A family history of cancer was present in 338 cases, 95 went on to have genetic counselling or had previously had counselling and 47 were genetically tested. We identified three carriers of an Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation in BRCA1. Conclusions Response rate to a family history questionnaire such as that used in genetics centres was low (10%) and other approaches will be needed to proactively assess family history. Although the Ashkenazim are present in 39% of the GP catchment area, 62% of those who returned a family history questionnaire were from this ethnic group and of those returned, 44% warranted referral to a cancer genetics unit. In the non Ashkenazim, the questionnaire return rate was 38% and 18% of those warranted referral to cancer genetics.
    Familial Cancer 03/2012; 11(1):107-13. · 1.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We have conducted a telelink telephone-led cancer genetic counselling model at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. The study commenced in March 2004 and evaluation of the clinic was conducted over 17 months from March 2005 to the end of July 2006. A total of 612 patients had telephone consultations during this time, 228 of whom were referred from primary care with a median of 30 patients counselled per month (range of 19-63, depending on staff availability with average of two staff per clinic). Waiting times were measured for General Practitioner referrals and all 228 were counselled within the national target-stipulated 13 weeks (median 6 weeks, range 1-12). An additional 132 patients who were sent appointment letters after receipt of their family history questionnaires did not attend their appointments (18% of all potential referrals) and required recontacting by letter. After telephone counselling, 42% of patients were able to be discharged from the telephone clinic without a subsequent face-to-face appointment, thereby saving resources. The telephone clinic also had a short set-up time with flexibility on timing and day of administration, which would be an advantage in centres where outreach clinic facilities are scarce. The telelink telephone counselling model is highly efficient in triaging high risk individuals for face-to-face counselling as per the Kenilworth model, in effecting concentration of resources and in providing a flexible individual-centred approach to cancer genetic counselling delivery.
    Familial Cancer 02/2007; 6(2):213-9. · 1.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    R Eeles, Kathryn Myhill