Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

The problem with a negative BRCA test

Jan Gurley, MD
Conditions
June 19, 2013
Share
Tweet
Share

There is nothing so horrifying as when your doctor is too nice to you. During my first mammogram at Kaiser Permanente, I knew I had cancer before they even told me because of the hushed voices, the pats on my shoulder, and the way, suddenly, no one cared how much time was being spent on my visit. When that happens to you before the diagnosis is official, there is nothing more panic-inducing.

Just as bad, for me, was the pitying sorrow of the radiologist as she hung up my mammogram to show me the scattered, dime-sized calcifications. It appeared as if I had been buckshot in the chest. She took five biopsies of the worst spot in my left breast. I left with a massive pressure dressing topped with an ice pack, both cinched tight as though my heart threatened to fall out.

I walked into work the next day at my clinic, wondering if anyone would notice the bulky third boob. No one did, but as one of the most lovely nurses at our clinic, Ninfa, asked me in passing, “How’s it going?”

I found myself weeping as I tried to say, “Fine.”

She pulled me into a supply closet and gently, carefully hugged me until I could pull myself together. The call came later that day. Yes, it was cancer. Estimated initially at 8mm (when 5mm is the absolute biggest, in terms of survival, that anyone would want).

“And,” the radiologist said, “I’m sorry, you’ll have to have a mastectomy, at least on the left side. If I biopsy all the abnormal lesions, you’d end up with mastectomy-by-biopsy. You’ll need to talk to your surgeon about what to do on the right.”

None of these lesions appeared overnight. I have a bad family history, but I’d had mammograms regularly since age 40, one biopsy in my early 40s that was “okay” and even genetic testing that indicated I was “negative” for increased risk. Every year or so for 11 years I’d gotten my postcard saying I was fine. It was only because I changed my health care to Kaiser that I learned about any of these abnormalities, and, frankly, my life was saved. So how the hell did an informed doctor end up in this position?

You can die from human nature, especially after being labeled “negative.”

I don’t know, frankly, how mammograms as appalling as mine continued unaddressed for so long. But as a health care insider, I’ve got some sense of how easily it could happen. In my early 40s I’d had a biopsy that was “negative,” and I had BRCA testing that was negative. All of this was occurring at an institution whose researchers were making a national name for themselves by promoting the idea that we women can’t deal with the complexities of false positive biopsies and scary mammograms, so – even though mammograms absolutely save lives – we should just offer fewer mammograms (a topic I wrote about here, long before I was diagnosed). Medicine is as trendy as any other field and this is the way the pendulum has been swinging.

So as my yearly images, packed with calcifications, came across the radiologists’ desks, they’d look at the previous year’s reading, realize that if they were the one to pull the trigger on this decision and go after a lesion, I’d end up biopsied to death. Did they want to be the person to do that? Besides, was it really that much worse than the year before? And wasn’t I BRCA negative, after all? And so, again, year after year, I was read as “fine.”

This type of scenario has happened to enough women that legislation has been passed in California to force radiologists to tell women about subtle abnormalities. It all boils down to how we are defining “negative.” A mammogram with many high-risk, arguably biopsy-able lesions is not “negative.” Similarly, having a negative BRCA test does not make you “negative,” except under very specific conditions.

If you are considering genetic testing yourself, here’s what it means if you test “negative.” Imagine that there are two drugs – one which is life-threatening and generally only used as a lethal poison, and a second drug that is a feel-good health booster. What if you gave both of them the exact same name? How many near-death medication errors do you think might occur?

This is exactly the same as calling as BRCA test results “negative.” But it’s a concept most doctors don’t understand at all. First, BRCA testing is not all-inclusive. With over a thousand mutations reported, and the price-gouging from the gene’s current patent holder, it’s nearly impossible to know just how thoroughly your gene test was done. If you have a bad family history and a “negative” result seems surprising, the recommendation is that you consider “more thorough” BRCA testing. I’m not sure if there’s a health plan that would ever cover that, or a provider, outside the most rarified academic centers, that would even know to recommend it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Second, if you are the first member of your family to be tested, or there aren’t enough family members’ info to give an adequate genetic history, your “negative” is supposed to be called “uninformative” – because you could have an equally lethal, as-yet-undescribed, or not searched for by the standard-scan, faulty BRCA gene. But if you even try to call your result “uninformative,” here, as you might expect, is how that conversation goes:

You tell your surgeon, “I had an uninformative BRCA test.”

The surgeon says, “You mean negative, right?”

“Well, no. Ok, yes – technically – but that means it’s uninformative,” you explain.

“It wasn’t positive?”

“No, but …”

“It’s negative then,” the surgeon says as she enters it into your electronic record.

Studies show that people who have negative BRCA tests still have a 4 times higher risk of getting breast cancer. Unless, that is, a BRCA test is done in a family that is already proven to have the BRCA gene. For example, if the BRCA test is done to see if daughter Shiloh inherited it from mother Angelina Jolie, and Shiloh’s test is negative, that means she never got the “faulty” gene and she would have even less risk of breast cancer than the general population.

We now have two BRCA negatives – one is life-threatening, and the other is a feel-good health-booster. They are both exactly “negative.” But these results are all being mixed up and passed around indiscriminately, with almost everyone assuming negative is good. If you are labeled a “negative,” make sure you’re armed with what it truly means, whether it’s a “negative” mammogram, or a “negative” BRCA test result.

Complexity, controversy, and poor classification, mixed with human nature, is what leads to appallingly bad health care.

Jan Gurley is an internal medicine physician who blogs at Doc Gurley.

Prev

How Edward Snowden and PRISM affect health care social media

June 19, 2013 Kevin 9
…
Next

Will health reform address the racial disparity of the uninsured?

June 19, 2013 Kevin 4
…

Tagged as: Oncology/Hematology

Post navigation

< Previous Post
How Edward Snowden and PRISM affect health care social media
Next Post >
Will health reform address the racial disparity of the uninsured?

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Jan Gurley, MD

  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Electronic medical records: Questions journalists should ask

    Jan Gurley, MD
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    The shocking lack of data behind the medical home

    Jan Gurley, MD
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    The data behind the medical home: High costs without a benefit?

    Jan Gurley, MD

More in Conditions

  • 5 cancer myths that could delay your diagnosis or treatment

    Joseph Alvarnas, MD
  • When bleeding disorders meet IVF: Navigating von Willebrand disease in fertility treatment

    Oluyemisi Famuyiwa, MD
  • What one diagnosis can change: the movement to make dining safer

    Lianne Mandelbaum, PT
  • How kindness in disguise is holding women back in academic medicine

    Sylk Sotto, EdD, MPS, MBA
  • Measles is back: Why vaccination is more vital than ever

    American College of Physicians
  • Hope is the lifeline: a deeper look into transplant care

    Judith Eguzoikpe, MD, MPH
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • Physician patriots: the forgotten founders who lit the torch of liberty

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Physician
    • The hidden cost of becoming a doctor: a South Asian perspective

      Momeina Aslam | Education
    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Closing the gap in respiratory care: How robotics can expand access in underserved communities

      Evgeny Ignatov, MD, RRT | Tech
    • Reclaiming trust in online health advice [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Why so many physicians struggle to feel proud—even when they should

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • If I had to choose: Choosing the patient over the protocol

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • How a TV drama exposed the hidden grief of doctors

      Lauren Weintraub, MD | Physician
    • Why adults need to rediscover the power of play

      Anthony Fleg, MD | Physician
    • How collaboration across medical disciplines and patient advocacy cured a rare disease [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 1 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • Physician patriots: the forgotten founders who lit the torch of liberty

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Physician
    • The hidden cost of becoming a doctor: a South Asian perspective

      Momeina Aslam | Education
    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Closing the gap in respiratory care: How robotics can expand access in underserved communities

      Evgeny Ignatov, MD, RRT | Tech
    • Reclaiming trust in online health advice [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Why so many physicians struggle to feel proud—even when they should

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • If I had to choose: Choosing the patient over the protocol

      Patrick Hudson, MD | Physician
    • How a TV drama exposed the hidden grief of doctors

      Lauren Weintraub, MD | Physician
    • Why adults need to rediscover the power of play

      Anthony Fleg, MD | Physician
    • How collaboration across medical disciplines and patient advocacy cured a rare disease [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

The problem with a negative BRCA test
1 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...