Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research 5/2014

Open Access 01-10-2014 | Research article

The Angelina Jolie effect: how high celebrity profile can have a major impact on provision of cancer related services

Authors: D Gareth R Evans, Julian Barwell, Diana M Eccles, Amanda Collins, Louise Izatt, Chris Jacobs, Alan Donaldson, Angela F Brady, Andrew Cuthbert, Rachel Harrison, Sue Thomas, Anthony Howell, Zosia Miedzybrodzka, Alex Murray, The FH02 Study Group, RGC teams

Published in: Breast Cancer Research | Issue 5/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

It is frequent for news items to lead to a short lived temporary increase in interest in a particular health related service, however it is rare for this to have a long lasting effect. In 2013, in the UK in particular, there has been unprecedented publicity in hereditary breast cancer, with Angelina Jolie’s decision to have genetic testing for the BRCA1 gene and subsequently undergo risk reducing mastectomy (RRM), and a pre-release of the NICE guidelines on familial breast cancer in January and their final release on 26th June. The release of NICE guidelines created a lot of publicity over the potential for use of chemoprevention using tamoxifen or raloxifene. However, the longest lasting news story was the release of details of film actress Angelina Jolie’s genetic test and surgery.

Methods

To assess the potential effects of the ‘Angelina Jolie’ effect, referral data specific to breast cancer family history was obtained from around the UK for the years 2012 and 2013. A consortium of over 30 breast cancer family history clinics that have contributed to two research studies on early breast surveillance were asked to participate as well as 10 genetics centres. Monthly referrals to each service were collated and increases from 2012 to 2013 assessed.

Results

Data from 12 family history clinics and 9 regional genetics services showed a rise in referrals from May 2013 onwards. Referrals were nearly 2.5 fold in June and July 2013 from 1,981 (2012) to 4,847 (2013) and remained at around two-fold to October 2013. Demand for BRCA1/2 testing almost doubled and there were also many more enquiries for risk reducing mastectomy. Internal review shows that there was no increase in inappropriate referrals.

Conclusions

The Angelina Jolie effect has been long lasting and global, and appears to have increased referrals to centres appropriately.

Literature
  1. thebmj News. [], [http://​www.​bmj.​com/​content/​346/​bmj.​f4116]
  2. The Boston Globe. [], [http://​www.​bostonglobe.​com/​lifestyle/​health-wellness/​2013/​12/​09/​increase-breast-cancer-gene-screening-angelina-jolie-effect/​0iwwmG7KqyPUQpHR​ouD0hN/​story.​html]
  3. CBC News. [], [http://​www.​cbc.​ca/​news/​canada/​nova-scotia/​angelina-jolie-effect-sparks-surge-in-genetic-testing-1.​2101587]
  4. The Sydney Morning Herald. [], [http://​www.​smh.​com.​au/​national/​health/​breast-cancer-genetic-testing-soars-after-angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-20131112-2xelm.​html]
  5. New Zealand Doctor. [], [http://​www.​nzherald.​co.​nz/​lifestyle/​news/​article.​cfm?​c_​id=​6&​objectid=​10891763]
  6. London Evening Standard. [], [http://​www.​standard.​co.​uk/​news/​health/​angelina-jolie-effect-has-doubled-hospital-breast-cancer-checks-8659187.​html]
  7. Hereditary Breast Cancer Helpline. ., [http://​www.​breastcancergene​tics.​co.​uk/​angelina%20​jolie.​html]
  8. Evans DGR, Fentiman IS, McPherson K, Asbury D, Ponder BAJ, Howell A: Familial breast cancer. Brit Med J. 1994, 308: 183-187. 10.1136/bmj.308.6922.183.View ArticlePubMedPubMed Central
  9. Evans DGR, Cuzick J, Howell A: Cancer Genetics Clinics. Eur J Cancer. 1996, 32: 391-392. 10.1016/0959-8049(96)00082-2.View Article
  10. Eccles DM, Evans DGR, Mackay J: Guidelines for a genetic risk based approach to advising women with a family history of breast cancer. J Med Genet. 2000, 37: 203-209. 10.1136/jmg.37.3.203.View ArticlePubMedPubMed Central
  11. McIntosh A, Shaw C, Evans G, Turnbull N, Bahar N, Barclay M, Easton D, Emery J, Gray J, Halpin J, Hopwood P, McKay J, Sheppard C, Sibbering M, Watson W, Wailoo A, Hutchinson A: Clinical Guidelines and Evidence Review for The Classification and Care of Women at Risk of Familial Breast Cancer. 2004, National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care/University of Sheffield, London
  12. Evans DG, Graham J, O'Connell S, Arnold S, Fitzsimmons D: Familial breast cancer: summary of updated NICE guidance. BMJ. 2013, 346: f3829-10.1136/bmj.f3829.View ArticlePubMed
  13. Mammographic surveillance in women younger than 50 years who have a family history of breast cancer: tumour characteristics and projected effect on mortality in the prospective, single-arm, FH01 study. Lancet Oncol. 2010, 11: 1127-1134. 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70263-1.
  14. Evans DG, Thomas S, Caunt J, Roberts L, Howell A, Wilson M, Fox R, Sibbering DM, Moss S, Wallis MG, Eccles DM: FH02 study group, Duffy S. Mammographic surveillance in women aged 35-39 at enhanced familial risk of breast cancer (FH02). Fam Cancer. 2014, 13 (1): 13-21. 10.1007/s10689-013-9661-8.View ArticlePubMed
  15. Borzekowski DL, Guan Y, Smith KC, Erby LH, Roter DL: The Angelina effect: immediate reach, grasp, and impact of going public. Genet Med. 2013, 16: 516-521. 10.1038/gim.2013.181.View ArticlePubMed
  16. NHS Cervical Cancer Screening Programme. [], [http://​www.​cancerscreening.​nhs.​uk/​cervical/​news/​020.​html]
  17. Lancucki L, Sasieni P, Patnick J, Day TJ, Vessey MP: The impact of Jade Goody’s diagnosis and death on the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. J Med Screen. 2012, 19: 89-93. 10.1258/jms.2012.012028.View ArticlePubMedPubMed Central
  18. Marlow LA, Sangha A, Patnick J, Waller J: The Jade Goody Effect: whose cervical screening decisions were influenced by her story?. J Med Screen. 2012, 19: 184-188. 10.1258/jms.2012.012095.View ArticlePubMed
  19. Cram P, Fendrick AM, Inadomi J, Cowen ME, Carpenter D, Vijan S: The impact of a celebrity promotional campaign on the use of colon cancer screening: the Katie Couric effect. Arch Intern Med. 2003, 163: 1601-1605. 10.1001/archinte.163.13.1601.View ArticlePubMed
  20. Kelaher M, Cawson J, Miller J, Kavanagh A, Dunt D, Studdert DM: Use of breast cancer screening and treatment services by Australian women aged 25-44 years following Kylie Minogue’s breast cancer diagnosis. Int J Epidemiol. 2005, 37 (6): 1326-1332. 10.1093/ije/dyn090.View Article
  21. Nattinger AB, Hoffmann RG, Howell-Pelz A, Goodwin JS: Effect of Nancy Reagan’s mastectomy on choice of surgery for breast cancer by US women. JAMA. 1998, 279: 762-766. 10.1001/jama.279.10.762.View ArticlePubMed
Metadata
Title
The Angelina Jolie effect: how high celebrity profile can have a major impact on provision of cancer related services
Authors
D Gareth R Evans
Julian Barwell
Diana M Eccles
Amanda Collins
Louise Izatt
Chris Jacobs
Alan Donaldson
Angela F Brady
Andrew Cuthbert
Rachel Harrison
Sue Thomas
Anthony Howell
Zosia Miedzybrodzka
Alex Murray
The FH02 Study Group
RGC teams
Publication date
01-10-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Breast Cancer Research / Issue 5/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1465-542X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-014-0442-6

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

Breast Cancer Research 5/2014 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine