The narrative paradox of the BRCA gene: an ethnographic study in the clinical encounters of ovarian cancer patients

References

• Bell, K., and S. Ristovski-Slijepcevic. 2011. “Metastatic Cancer and Mothering: Being a Mother in the Face of a Contracted Future.” Medical Anthropology 30 (6): 629–649. doi:10.1080/01459740.2011.588631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackman, L., and C. Venn. 2010. “Affect.” Body & Society 16 (1): 7–28. doi:10.1177/1357034X09354769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloch, E. 1986. The Principle of Hope. 3 vols. Translated and edited by Neville Plaice, Stephen Plaice, and Paul Knight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bourret, P. 2005. “BRCA Patients and Clinical Collectives: New Configurations of Action in Cancer Genetics Practices.” Social Studies of Science 35 (1): 41–68. doi:10.1177/0306312705048716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourret, P., P. Keating, and A. Cambrosio. 2014. “From BRCA to BRCAness: Tales of Translational Research.” In Breast Cancer Gene Research and Medical Practices: Translational Perspectives in the Time of BRCA, edited by S. Gibbon, G. Joseph, J. Mozersky, A. Z. Nieden, and S. Palfner. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, T., and A. Parkhurst. 2018. Medical Materialities: Toward a Material Culture of Medical Anthropology. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., and C. Waldby. 2014. Clinical Labor. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Day, S., R. C. Coombes, L. McGrath-Lone, C. Schoenborn, and H. Ward. 2016. “Stratified, Precision or Personalised Medicine? Cancer Services in the ‘Real World’ of a London Hospital.” Sociology of Health & Illness xx Illness, 39 (1): 143–158. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 2013. A Thousand Plateaus. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• DelVecchio Good, M. J. 2010. “The Medical Imaginary and the Biotechnical Embrace: Subjective Experiences of Clinical Scientists and Patients.” In A Reader in Medical Anthropology: Theoretical Trajectories, Emergent Realities, edited by B. Byron Good, M. Fischer, S. Willen, and M. J. Del Vecchio Good, 272–283. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• DelVecchio Good, M.-J., B. J. Good, C. Schaffer, and S. E. Lind. 1990. “American Oncology and the Discourse on Hope.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 14 (1): 59–79. doi:10.1007/BF00046704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geertz, C. 1983. Local Knowledge. New York: Basic Books. Cited in DelVecchio Good, M. J., B. J. Good, C. Schaffer, and S. E. Lind. 1990. American Oncology and the Discourse on Hope. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 14: 59–79. doi:10.1007/BF00046704.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon, S. 2007. Breast Cancer Genes and the Gendering of Knowledge: Science and Citizenship in the Cultural Context of the ‘New’ Genetics. London, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon, S. 2008. “Charity, Breast Cancer Activism and the Iconic Figure of the BRCA Carrier.” In Biosocialities, Genetics and the Social Sciences: Making Biologies and Identities, edited by S. Gibbon and C. Novas. Chapter 1. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon, S., G. Joseph, and J. Mozersky. 2014. In Breast Cancer Gene Research and Medical Practices: Translational Perspectives in the Time of BRCA, edited by A. Z. Nieden and S. Palfner. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Good, B. J., M.-J. DelVecchio Good, I. Togan, Z. Ilbars, A. Güvener, and I. Gelişen. 1994. “In the Subjunctive Mode: Epilepsy Narratives in Turkey.” Social Science & Medicine 38 (6): 835–842. Vol doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90155-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyman, D., and D. Spriggs. 2012. “Unwrapping the Implications of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations in Ovarian Cancer.” JAMA 307 (4): 408–410. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating, P., and A. Cambrosio. 2012. Cancer on Trial: Oncology as a New Style of Practice. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, A., and S. S. Cunningham-Burley. 2015. “Embodied Innovation and Regulation of Medical Technoscience: Transformations in Cancer Patienthood.” Law, Innovation and Technology 7 (2): 187–205. doi:10.1080/17579961.2015.1106103.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kleinman, A. 1988. The Illness Narratives: Suffering, Healing & the Human Condition. New York: Basic Book.
   Google Scholar
• Ledermann, J., and R. Kristeleit. 2010. “Optimal Treatment for Relapsing Ovarian Cancer.” Annals of Oncology 21 (suppl_7): vii218–vii222. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq377.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lochlann, J. S. 2010. “The Mortality Effect: Counting the Dead in the Cancer Trial.” Public Culture 22 (1): 89–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MCG (Mainstreaming Cancer Genetics). 2016. ‘Delivering Change in Cancer Gene to Testing to Benefit Many More Cancer Patients.’ Accessed August 27, 2016. https://mcgprogramme.com/2014/04/.
   Google Scholar
• McMullin, J., and D. Weiner. 2008. Confronting Cancer: Metaphors, Advocacy, and Anthropology. Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miyazaki, H. 2004. The Methods of Hope: Anthropology, Philosophy, and Fijian Knowledge. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mozersky, J., and S. Gibbon. 2014. “Mapping Jewish Identities: Migratory Histories and the Transnational Re-Framing of the Ashkenazi BRCA Mutations.” In Breast Cancer Gene Research and Medical Practices: Translational Perspectives in the Time of BRCA, edited by S. Gibbon, G. Joseph, J. Mozersky, A. Z. Nieden, and S. Palfner, 35–56. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, Vinh-kim. 2005. “Antiretroviral Globalism, Biopolitics, and Therapeutic Citizenship.” In Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, edited by A. Ong and S. J. Collier, 124–145. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• NICE (National Institute for Health Care and Clinical Excellence). 2016. Technology appraisal guidance [TA381]. Accessed July 27, 2016. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta381/chapter/4-Committeediscussion#summary-of-appraisal-committees-key-conclusions.
   Google Scholar
• Rabinow, P. 1999. “Artificiality and Enlightenment: From Sociobiology to Biosociality.” In The Science Studies Reader, edited by M. Biagiolo. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rapp, R. 2014. “Foreword.” In Breast Cancer Gene Research and Medical Practices: Translational Perspectives in the Time of BRCA, edited by S. Gibbon, G. Joseph, J. Mozersky, A. Z. Nieden, and S. Palfner, xx. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds Whyte, S., S. van der Geest, and A. Hardon. 2002. Social Lives of Medicines. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N. 2007. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N., and C. Novas. 2005. “Biological Citizenship.” In Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, edited by A. Ong and S. J. Collier, 439–464. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Timmerman, S., and M. Buchbinder. 2013. Saving Babies? The Consequences of Newborn Genetic Screening. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walkerdine, V. 2010. “Communal Beingness and Affect: An Exploration of Trauma in an Ex- Industrial Community.” Body & Society 1: 91–116. doi:10.1177/1357034X09354127.
   Google Scholar