Got your BRCA test more than 13 years ago? It may have missed a cancer-linked mutation

Read the original at New York Post ↗
New York Post · collected 2026-10-13 · by Allie Yang

Quick Summary

Older BRCA tests from before 2013 might have missed cancer-linked mutations that are now detectable. A study found that one in six women who previously tested negative actually had dangerous genetic variants when retested later. This discrepancy is due to earlier limited testing methods focusing mainly on BRCA1 and BRCA2, while newer tests can identify mutations in over 50 genes associated with cancer risk.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-13, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

Women who received genetic testing for breast cancer-linked gene mutations before 2013 may have missed important variants that are now easily detectable, according to recent studies. A study found that about 17.3% of women who tested negative earlier actually carried dangerous mutations when retested later. This discrepancy is partly due to the fact that, until recently, testing primarily focused on identifying BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations exclusively, as Myriad Genetics, which discovered these genes in the 90s, held exclusive rights to test for them for over a decade. Now, researchers are investigating dozens of other genes that may also increase breast cancer risk, emphasizing the importance of retesting for more comprehensive results.

Written for “BRCA Test Mutation Missed” on 2026-10-13, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
This article does not take a side on a contested political question, so it has no leaning score. That is an answer rather than a gap: a match report or a rescue can be warmly or critically written without being left or right, and scoring it anyway is how approval of a subject gets recorded as a political position.
No political leaning scored for article 77491 · logged 2026-10-13

Story

📰 BRCA Test Mutation Missed
Health · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.

Cite this article

Yang, A. (2026, October 13). Got your BRCA test more than 13 years ago? It may have missed a cancer-linked mutation. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2026/10/13/health/old-brca-tests-may-have-missed-a-cancer-linked-mutation/

Dated from the outlet's own feed. Check the original for its byline.

How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
20
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
15%
3 of 20 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
67/100
New York Post's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Health
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-10-13 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

New York Post · 9862 article(s) · 30 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 30 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Allie Yang
23 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 But women who got their genetic test results a while ago — before 2013 — may find it missed mutations we can easily test for now.
🔮 On average, data shows the women who reach age 70 live to be about 91, while roughly 1 in seven women who reached age 70 would live to 100.
🔮 You might not turn into a pumpkin, but at midnight, your brain could be undergoing a dramatic transformation.
🔮 Your nails might be trying to tell you something — and checking them could be the easiest way (hands down) to spot hidden health problems.
🔮 Mia Shay St. Hilaire was visiting a cafe in London with her aunt and sister when she ordered the Twix milkshake that would take her life.
🔮 “I would put it a nine out of 10,” she said of the pain in an interview with People.
🔮 Ozempic and Mounjaro can cost an arm and a leg — and maybe a fingernail.
2026-10-08 · assertive framing · GLP-1s linked to a nasty side effect in nails: study
🔮 They wondered whether the health of one could offer clues about how quickly the other would decline.
🔮 If it ruptures, it could spread infection through the body and become life-threatening.
🔮 Gestational diabetes happens in 5% to 9% of pregnancies in the US and gives a strong indication mom will develop diabetes later in life.
Also by Allie Yang
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 23 articles by Allie Yang →

Topics

Myriad Genetics the Supreme Court the Washington Post

Subjects

the Washington Post ORG · 2× Myriad Genetics ORG · 1× Sofia Merajver PERSON · 1× Versha Pleasant PERSON · 1× the Supreme Court ORG · 1×

Narrative

But that’s not an exhaustive list: Dozens of other genes are being investigated to see if they increase a person’s risk of breast cancer. “It’s very worthwhile for someone to get retested because if you’ve only been tested for BRCA1 and 2, you only have part of the story,” Dr. Versha Pleasant, a breast cancer researcher, told the Washington Post.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-10-13
🔮 But women who got their genetic test results a while ago — before 2013 — may find it missed mutations we can easily test for now.

Claims (20 extracted, 3 hedged)

About 5 to 10% of breast cancer cases are linked to inherited gene mutations, which is why doctors recommend all women complete a risk assessment by age 25 to determine if they should get further genetic testing for cancer-linked BRCA mutations. asserted
they → link → mutations
But women who got their genetic test results a while ago — before 2013 — may find it missed mutations we can easily test for now. uncertain
we → get → mutations
In fact, a recent study found than one in six women (17.3%) who tested negative for dangerous mutations in the early days of testing actually did have a dangerous variant when they retested an average of five years later. asserted
they → find → variant
“There are probably thousands of individuals out there who need to be retested,” Dr. Sofia Merajver, a breast cancer researcher, told the Washington Post. asserted
Merajver → be → Post
You’ve probably heard of BRCA1 and BRCA2 — when these genes mutate, they carry the highest risk of breast cancer. asserted
they → hear → cancer
When cancer does develop in people with mutations on these genes, it’s often more aggressive. asserted
it → develop → genes
These genes were identified back in the 90s by Myriad Genetics, and for 15 years, the company held exclusive rights to screen and test for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. asserted
company → identify → mutations
Tests usually looked for one or the other, or both, excluding many other genes we now know hold risk. asserted
we → look → risk
In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that human genes couldn’t be patented, opening the door easier testing that looked at both BRCA genes as well as mutations on up to 50 cancer-related genes in one test. asserted
that → rule → test
After 2013, costs also dropped from around $4,000 to less than $400. asserted
costs → drop → 400
As a result, testing among both men and women steadily increased over the next decade. asserted
testing → increase → decade
As research has expanded, we now know about at least 11 more genes linked to increased risk of breast cancer outside of BRCA1 and BRCA2. asserted
we → expand → BRCA1
But that’s not an exhaustive list: Dozens of other genes are being investigated to see if they increase a person’s risk of breast cancer. “It’s very worthwhile for someone to get retested because if you’ve only been tested for BRCA1 and 2, you only have part of the story,” Dr. Versha Pleasant, a breast cancer researcher, told the Washington Post. asserted
Pleasant → ’ → Post
Should you get tested for genetic breast cancer risk? asserted
you → test → risk
In the study that showed more than one in six women got a false negative on breast cancer genetic testing, most only returned to get retested after a family member was diagnosed. asserted
member → show → testing
Having a first degree relative (parent, sibling, or child) with breast cancer almost doubles a woman’s risk of developing it themselves. asserted
relative → have → it
Family history is one of the most important factors in a standard risk assessment assessing whether you should get genetic testing done. asserted
testing → assess → assessment
Ideally, it should be done with a doctor as DIY risk assessments Genetic testing especially important for those who’ve already been diagnosed with cancer, as genetic mutations could change treatment plans. For example, after a test shows a high-risk inherited gene mutation, a doctor may recommend a mastectomy (removal of all breast tissue) rather than a lumpectomy (removal of the tumor only, preserving the breast) to drop risk of cancer returning to the single digits. uncertain
cancer → do → digits
Also, medications may work well for a certain mutation but not another. uncertain
medications → work → mutation
Genetic testing can point doctors to what treatment will work best. asserted
treatment → point → doctors
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support