{"title":"Association between cancer screenings uptake and genetic testing for cancer risk among US adults: findings from HINTS 2017-2020.","authors":"Young-Rock Hong, Ruixuan Wang, Allison Carrier, Luisel Ricks-Santi, Turner Kea, Krupal Patel, Beth A Virnig, Ilyas Sahin, Dejana Braithwaite","doi":"10.1007/s12687-025-00797-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Genetic testing for cancer risk is a vital tool for preventive care, yet its association with the uptake of evidence-based cancer screening remains unclear. This study examined the association between cancer-risk genetic testing and cancer screening uptake using data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (2017 and 2020), a nationally representative sample of US adults. We focused on the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended screening tests for colorectal (CRC), breast, and cervical cancers. Multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors, were used to assess the relationship between cancer screening uptake and cancer-risk genetic testing. The analysis included 6,629 respondents (mean age 48.5 years; 50.7% female; 61.1% non-Hispanic White). Of the respondents, 3.3% had undergone genetic testing for cancer risk. Among eligible populations, screening uptake was 85.2% for Pap tests, 80.8% for mammograms, and 81.3% for CRC. Unadjusted analysis showed a significant association between breast cancer screening and genetic testing (p = 0.005), which lost significance after covariate adjustment. Most respondents who underwent genetic testing received result interpretation assistance from healthcare providers and genetic counselors. Among those who received genetic testing, all respondents who received assistance from genetic counselors were adherent to cancer screening recommendations. Our results suggest that while genetic testing was associated with breast cancer screening in unadjusted analyses, this association was not maintained after adjusting for covariates. No significant associations were found between genetic testing and cervical cancer or CRC screening. Further research using prospective designs is needed to examine the effectiveness of genetic testing in enhancing cancer prevention and screening efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"545-556"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12401849/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-025-00797-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Genetic testing for cancer risk is a vital tool for preventive care, yet its association with the uptake of evidence-based cancer screening remains unclear. This study examined the association between cancer-risk genetic testing and cancer screening uptake using data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (2017 and 2020), a nationally representative sample of US adults. We focused on the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-recommended screening tests for colorectal (CRC), breast, and cervical cancers. Multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors, were used to assess the relationship between cancer screening uptake and cancer-risk genetic testing. The analysis included 6,629 respondents (mean age 48.5 years; 50.7% female; 61.1% non-Hispanic White). Of the respondents, 3.3% had undergone genetic testing for cancer risk. Among eligible populations, screening uptake was 85.2% for Pap tests, 80.8% for mammograms, and 81.3% for CRC. Unadjusted analysis showed a significant association between breast cancer screening and genetic testing (p = 0.005), which lost significance after covariate adjustment. Most respondents who underwent genetic testing received result interpretation assistance from healthcare providers and genetic counselors. Among those who received genetic testing, all respondents who received assistance from genetic counselors were adherent to cancer screening recommendations. Our results suggest that while genetic testing was associated with breast cancer screening in unadjusted analyses, this association was not maintained after adjusting for covariates. No significant associations were found between genetic testing and cervical cancer or CRC screening. Further research using prospective designs is needed to examine the effectiveness of genetic testing in enhancing cancer prevention and screening efforts.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals.
Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues.
The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.
The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.