Feeling at risk: how women interpret their familial breast cancer risk

Qualitative analysis of how patients decide that they want risk-reducing mastectomy, and the implications for surgeons in responding to emotionally-motivated patient requests

OBJECTIVE

Contemporary approaches to medical decision-making advise that clinicians should respect patients' decisions. However, patients' decisions are often shaped by heuristics, such as being guided by emotion, rather than by objective risk and benefit. Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) decisions focus this dilemma sharply. RRM reduces breast cancer (BC) risk, but is invasive and can have iatrogenic consequences. Previous evidence suggests that emotion guides patients' decision-making about RRM. We interviewed patients to better understand how they made decisions about RRM, using findings to consider how clinicians could ethically respond to their decisions.

METHODS

Qualitative face-to-face interviews with 34 patients listed for RRM surgery and two who had decided against RRM.

RESULTS

Patients generally did not use objective risk estimates or, indeed, consider risks and benefits of RRM. Instead emotions guided their decisions: they chose RRM because they feared BC and wanted to do 'all they could' to prevent it. Most therefore perceived RRM to be the 'obvious' option and made the decision easily. However, many recounted extensive post-decisional deliberation, generally directed towards justifying the original decision. A few patients deliberated before the decision because fears of surgery counterbalanced those of BC.

CONCLUSION

Patients seeking RRM were motivated by fear of BC, and the need to avoid potential regret for not doing all they could to prevent it. We suggest that choices such as that for RRM, which are made emotionally, can be respected as autonomous decisions, provided patients have considered risks and benefits. Drawing on psychological theory about how people do make decisions, as well as normative views of how they should, we propose that practitioners can guide consideration of risks and benefits even, where necessary, after patients have opted for surgery. This model of practice could be extended to other medical decisions that are influenced by patients' emotions.

How do women at increased breast cancer risk perceive and decide between risks of cancer and risk-reducing treatments? A synthesis of qualitative research

Objective

Risk‐reducing procedures can be offered to people at increased cancer risk, but many procedures can have iatrogenic effects. People therefore need to weigh risks associated with both cancer and the risk‐reduction procedure in their decisions. By reviewing relevant literature on breast cancer (BC) risk reduction, we aimed to understand how women at relatively high risk of BC perceive their risk and how their risk perceptions influence their decisions about risk reduction.

Methods

Synthesis of 15 qualitative studies obtained from systematic searches of SCOPUS, Web of Knowledge, PsychINFO, and Medline electronic databases (inception‐June 2015).

Results

Women did not think about risk probabilistically. Instead, they allocated themselves to broad risk categories, typically influenced by their own or familial experiences of BC. In deciding about risk‐reduction procedures, some women reported weighing the risks and benefits, but papers did not describe how they did so. For many women, however, an overriding wish to reduce intense worry about BC led them to choose aggressive risk‐reducing procedures without such deliberation.

Conclusions

Reasoning that categorisation is a fundamental aspect of risk perception, we argue that patients can be encouraged to develop more nuanced and accurate categorisations of their own risk through their interactions with clinicians. Empirically‐based ethical reflection is required to determine whether and when it is appropriate to provide risk‐reduction procedures to alleviate worry.

Improved health perception after genetic counselling for women at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer: construction of new questionnaires--an Italian exploratory study

BACKGROUND

Subjects referred to genetic counselling for cancer may have heightened perceptions of illness and death, even though they are healthy and this may cause anxiety and reluctance to follow through with consultation. We investigated such perceptions before and after counselling and genetic testing for cancer in a cohort of Italian women. We sought to understand the situation of the women referred by designing questionnaires administered to women at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer (those who had had a pathogenic mutation identified in a family member via diagnostic testing). We also assessed women after the diagnosis of breast cancers, but free of disease, to help determine risks in their families.

METHODS

The first questionnaires were administered before initial counselling, and the second were completed within 20 days after the counselling. When a genetic test was proposed, the individual was asked to fill in a third questionnaire; the final questionnaire was administered after the person had received the results of the genetic test.

RESULTS

We evaluated 204 subjects. Before counselling, 89 % of the subjects were worried about their risk of disease, 52 % felt "different" because of their personal and family history, and 39 % declared that their life choices were influenced by their fear of cancer. After counselling, 82 % of the subjects felt more relived about their pre-existing fears and stated that this process of being seen in a clinic with genetic expertise had clarified the meaning of disease risk for them, and for 50 %, this experience had positively influenced their life choices. Thirty percentage of the subjects had a positive test; all of them felt safer in being cared for by specifically trained staff. Fifty percentage had a less informative test (e.g. "wild-type" gene found); 84 % of them were not worried by the uncertainty, and overall, 96 % considered counselling to be very useful.

CONCLUSION

Candidates for genetic counselling frequently had heightened their perception of being ill, which influenced their ability to make life decisions. Genetic counselling often improves this perception, especially in subjects who have negative tests and this knowledge facilitates their life plans. After testing, most women felt satisfied and safer because of being properly followed by professionally trained and sympathetic staff. In conclusion, knowledge of the real individual risk, the presence of a professional team, and the possibility of entering a programme of controlled screening enable patients rather than living in fear and uncertainty to be less anxious about their state of health and to live with the knowledge that they are doing everything possible to care for themselves, aided by a specialized team, and that, if necessary, they would be able to take part in investigational studies.

Counselees' Expressed Level of Understanding of the Risk Estimate and Surveillance Recommendation are Not Associated with Breast Cancer Surveillance Adherence

We studied counselees’ expressed understanding of the risk estimate and surveillance recommendation in the final consultation for breast cancer genetic counseling in relation with their risk perception, worry and cancer surveillance adherence 1 year post-counseling. Consecutive counselees were included from 2008 to 2010. Counselees with an indication for diagnostic DNA-testing for themselves or a breast cancer affected relative were requested to complete online questionnaires before and after counseling and one year after counseling (N = 152–124). Self-reported surveillance was compared to surveillance recommendations. Consultations were videotaped. Counselees’ reactions to the risks and recommendations were coded. Statements about the risk perception and surveillance intentions of breast cancer unaffected counselees were transcribed. Associations with outcomes were explored. Almost all breast cancer unaffected counselees (>90 %) reacted to their risk estimate with an utterance indicating understanding and this reaction was not significantly associated with their post-visit risk perception alignment. Over one-third (38.6 %) overestimated their risk post-counseling. Few counselees (5.8 %) expressed surveillance intentions. One year after counseling, about three-quarters (74.0 %) of the breast cancer unaffected counselees had adhered to the surveillance recommendation. Almost one-quarter (23.3 %) had performed more mammograms/MRI scans than recommended, which was associated with prior mammography uptake (n = 47; X² = 5.2; p = .02). Counselees’ post-counseling overestimation of their risk, high levels of worry and high surveillance uptake were not reflected in their reactions to the counselor’s information during the final visit.

Intuition versus cognition: a qualitative exploration of how women understand and manage their increased breast cancer risk

Risk comprehension in individuals at increased familial risk of cancer is suboptimal and little is known about how risk is understood and managed by at-risk individuals who do not undergo genetic testing. We qualitatively studied these issues in 36 unaffected women from high-risk breast cancer families, including both women who had and had not undergone genetic testing. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and data analysis was guided by Grounded Theory. Risk comprehension and risk management were largely influenced by the individual's experience of coming from a high-risk family, with both tested and untested women relying heavily on their intuition. Although women's cognitive understanding of their risk appeared generally accurate, this objective risk information was considered of secondary value. The findings could be used to guide the development and delivery of information about risk and risk management to genetically tested and untested individuals at increased risk of hereditary cancer.

Follow-up effects of a tailored pre-counseling website with question prompt in breast cancer genetic counseling

OBJECTIVE

Pre-counseling education helps counselees to prepare for breast cancer genetic counseling and might subsequently result in more positive experiences, improved cognitive outcomes and more experienced control. This study assessed the effects of a website with tailored information and a blank sheet to fill in questions (question prompt; QP), at 1 week and 1 year post-counseling.

METHODS

Consecutive counselees were randomized to the usual care group (UC) or the intervention group (UC+website+QP). Counselees completed questionnaires pre- and post-counseling and 1 year follow-up. We conducted multilevel regression analyses corrected for time.

RESULTS

Intervention group counselees (n = 103) were more satisfied about their final visit (β = .35; CI: .06-.65; P = .02; n = 156) than UC group counselees (n = 94). Intervention group counselees also reported more positive experiences with the counseling (β = .32; CI: .06-.59; P = .02; n = 188) and higher perceived personal control 1 year post-counseling (β = .51; CI: .18-.84; P = .002; n = 193). No significant effects were found on recall, knowledge, anxiety, cancer worry, risk perception alignment and adherence to breast surveillance advice.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that pre-counseling education providing tailored information and QP, might lead to improvements in experiences with the counseling and perceived personal control 1 year post-counseling.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Online pre-visit information is a feasible tool to enhance counselees' experiences.

Counselee participation in follow-up breast cancer genetic counselling visits and associations with achievement of the preferred role, cognitive outcomes, risk perception alignment and perceived personal control

The purpose of the study was to assess the counselee participation in the follow-up visits, compared to the first visits, for breast cancer genetic counselling and to explore associations with counselees' achievement of their preferred role in decision making, information recall, knowledge, risk perception alignment and perceived personal control. First and follow-up visits for breast cancer genetic counselling of 96 counselees of a Dutch genetics center were videotaped (2008-2010). Counselees completed questionnaires before counselling (T1), after the follow-up visit (T2) and one year after the follow-up visit (T3). Consultations were rated with the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Counselee participation was measured as the percentage of counselee utterances, the percentage of counselee questions and the interactivity (number of turns per minute). Follow-up visits had higher levels of counselee participation than first visits as assessed by the percentage of counselee talk, the interactivity and counselee questions. More counselee talk in the follow-up visit was related to higher achievement of the preferred role (T2) and higher perceived personal control (T3). Higher interactivity in the follow-up visit was related to lower achievement of the preferred role in decision making and lower information recall (T2). There were no significant associations with the percentage of questions asked and none of the participation measures was related to knowledge, risk perception alignment and perceived personal control (T2). In line with the interviewing admonishment 'talk less and listen more', the only assessment of counselee participation associated to better outcomes is the percentage of counselee talk. High interactivity might be associated with lower recall in breast cancer genetic counselees who are generally highly educated. However, this study was limited by a small sample size and a heterogeneous group of counselees. Research is needed on the interactions causing interactivity and its relationships with involvement in decision making and recall.

Short-term psychological impact of the BRCA1/2 test result in women with breast cancer according to their perceived probability of genetic predisposition to cancer

Background:

The effect of BRCA1/2 gene test result on anxiety, depression, cancer-related thought intrusion or avoidance and perceived control over cancer risk was assessed in breast cancer (BC) patients, according to their perceived probability of genetic predisposition to cancer.

Methods:

Two hundred and forty-three (89% response rate) women with BC completed questionnaires after an initial genetic counselling visit (T1), of which 180 (66%) completed questionnaires again after receiving the BRCA1/2 results (T2). The discrepancy between women's perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition at T1 and the geneticist's computed estimates was assessed.

Results:

In all, 74% of women received a negative uninformative (NU), 11% a positive BRCA1/2 and 15% an unclassified variant (UV) result. On hierarchical regression analysis, in women with a positive BRCA1/2 result (vs NU or UV), a lower perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition than objective estimates at T1 predicted lower levels of anxiety at T2 (β=−0.28; P<0.01), whereas in women receiving a UV result (vs NU or positive BRCA1/2), a lower perceived probability of cancer genetic predisposition than objective estimates at T1 predicted higher levels of anxiety (β=0.20; P<0.01), depression (β=0.19; P<0.05) and intrusion (β=0.18; P<0.05) at T2.

Conclusion:

The type of BRCA1/2 test result differently affects distress according to women's perceived probability of genetic predisposition before testing.

Psychological distress in newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients following microsatellite instability testing for Lynch syndrome on the pathologist's initiative

According to the Dutch Guideline on Hereditary Colorectal Cancer published in 2008, patients with recently diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) should undergo microsatellite instability (MSI) testing by a pathologist immediately after tumour resection if they are younger than 50 years, or if a second CRC has been diagnosed before the age of 70 years, owing to the high risk of Lynch syndrome (MIPA). The aim of the present MIPAPS study was to investigate general distress and cancer-specific distress following MSI testing. From March 2007 to September 2009, 400 patients who had been tested for MSI after newly diagnosed CRC were recruited from 30 Dutch hospitals. Levels of general distress (SCL-90) and cancer-specific distress (IES) were assessed immediately after MSI result disclosure (T1) and 6 months later (T2). Response rates were 23/77 (30%) in the MSI-positive patients and 58/323 (18%) in the MSI-negative patients. Levels of general distress and cancer-specific distress were moderate. In the MSI-positive group, 27% of the patients had high general distress at T1 versus 18% at T2 (p = 0.5), whereas in the MSI-negative group, these percentage were 14 and 18% (p = 0.6), respectively. At T1 and T2, cancer-specific distress rates in the MSI-positive group and MSI-negative group were 39 versus 27% (p = 0.3) and 38 versus 36% (p = 1.0), respectively. High levels of general distress were correlated with female gender, low social support and high perceived cancer risk. Moderate levels of distress were observed after MSI testing, similar to those found in other patients diagnosed with CRC. Immediately after result disclosure, high cancer-specific distress was observed in 40% of the MSI-positive patients.

A counselee-oriented perspective on risk communication in genetic counseling: explaining the inaccuracy of the counselees' risk perception shortly after BRCA1/2 test result disclosure

PURPOSE

Genetic counseling may help counselees understand their genetic risk of developing breast/ovarian cancer. However, many studies have shown that their perception of their risks is inaccurate. Information-oriented variables often predicted the level of accuracy, focusing on specific processes of receiving and processing risks. We examined counselee-oriented predictors about how counselees embed cancer risks in their lives. These predictors reflect the personal meaning of genetic risks and are expected to explain/mediate the impact of genetic counseling on risk-perception-accuracy.

METHOD

We analyzed 248 questionnaires of a prospective study, filled in by probands with breast/ovarian cancer and pathogenic mutations, unclassified variants, or uninformative results (n = 30, 16, and 202, respectively). Mediation regression analyses were performed to examine whether counselee predictors mediated/explained the influence of information predictors on the accuracy. Information-oriented predictors regarded presentation format, communicated information, question format, education, pedigree information, cancer experience, and cognitive processes/heuristics. Counselee-oriented predictors regarded their self/personality, life/existence, and need for certainty about DNA test result, heredity, and cancer.

RESULTS

Both information-oriented and counselee-oriented variables significantly predicted the accuracy of the counselees' risk perception, with moderate to large effect sizes. Counselee-oriented variables completely mediated/explained the effects of information-oriented variables on the accuracy.

DISCUSSION

Counselees seemed to transform objective cancer risks into personally relevant information. Only through this personal meaning of genetic information, information-oriented processes seemed to cause inaccurate perceptions. Genetic counselors are suggested to focus communication on these personal processes.

Exploring the short-term impact of DNA-testing in breast cancer patients: the counselees' perception matters, but the actual BRCA1/2 result does not

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies suggest that learning a DNA-test-result has no direct impact on the medical-decisions and psychological well-being of counselees. Their perception, especially their recollections and interpretations of their cancer-risks and heredity, predict and/or mediate this impact. These studies were criticized for their small range of predictors, mediators, outcomes and contextual factors. We studied the short-term impact of DNA-testing with an extended model.

METHODS

Three months after disclosure of BRCA1/2-test-results, we sent counselees a questionnaire about their perception, medical and psychological outcomes, and medical, familial and psychological contexts. 248 affected women participated; 30 had received pathogenic-mutations, 16 unclassified-variants and 202 uninformative-results.

RESULTS

The actually communicated genetic-information and the contextual variables predicted the counselees' perception, but did not directly predict any outcomes. The counselees' perception predicted and/or completely mediated the counselees' medical intentions and behavior, physical and psychological life-changes, stigma, mastery, negativity and cancer-worries. Short-term distress was related to the perception not only of their own risks, but also of their relatives' risks and heredity-likelihood. Effect sizes were medium to large.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The outcomes of DNA-testing were better predicted by the counselees' perception than by the actually given genetic-information. We recommend genetic-counselors to have tailored, interactive dialogues about the counselees' perception.

"It's not like judgment day": public understanding of and reactions to personalized genomic risk information

The value of genomic risk assessment depends upon patients making appropriate behavioral changes in response to increased risk leading to disease prevention and early detection. To date, few studies have investigated consumers' response to personalized genomic disease risk information. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 60 adults participating in the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative. The interviews took place after receiving results providing genomic and other risk information for up to eight common complex diseases. We found that participants were most likely to recall results which conferred an increased risk or those of particular personal interest. Participants understood the multi-factorial nature of common complex disease, and generally did not have negative emotional responses or overly deterministic perceptions of their results. Although most participants expressed a desire to use results to improve their health, a minority had actually taken action (behavior change or shared results with their doctor) at the time of the interview. These results suggest that participants have a reasonable understanding of genomic risk information and that provision of genomic risk information may motivate behavior change in some individuals; however additional work is needed to better understand the lack of change seen in the majority of participants.

Breast cancer genetic counselling referrals: how comparable are the findings between the UK and the Netherlands?

Counselees from different countries may differ in demographic and medical characteristics and this could affect their pre-counselling cognitions and psychosocial variables. Research outcomes may therefore not be easily transferable between countries. To examine this, a cross-national comparison of UK (West Midlands: WM) and Dutch (Middle Netherlands: MN) counselees in breast cancer genetic counselling was conducted. Two hundred thirty-eight WM and 156 MN proband counselees were compared on demographics, breast cancer history and referral pathways. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to check whether national differences in knowledge of breast cancer and heredity, risk perception, worry and information needs persisted when corrected for the background characteristics. About half of the Dutch compared to 8% of UK counselees were affected by breast cancer. More UK than Dutch counselees were at high risk from hereditary breast cancer. UK counselees had higher risk perceptions and more knowledge about breast cancer prevalence, but these differences lost significance when corrected for counselees' risk levels and other background characteristics. Counselees from the UK might report higher levels of worry than Dutch counselees and this could not be explained by their background characteristics. Comparisons of findings between the UK and the Netherlands show that the UK seems to have a higher percentage of high-risk referrals and these counselees seem to have higher risk perceptions. Irrespective of their actual risk level, UK counselees might be more worried. Comparing findings between the different countries raises questions about how transferable research findings are from one culture to another.

How do women at increased, but unexplained, familial risk of breast cancer perceive and manage their risk? A qualitative interview study

Background

The perception of breast cancer risk held by women who have not had breast cancer, and who are at increased, but unexplained, familial risk of breast cancer is poorly described. This study aims to describe risk perception and how it is related to screening behaviour for these women.

Methods

Participants were recruited from a population-based sample (the Australian Breast Cancer Family Study - ABCFS). The ABCFS includes women diagnosed with breast cancer and their relatives. For this study, women without breast cancer with at least one first- or second-degree relative diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 were eligible unless a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation had been identified in their family. Data collection consisted of an audio recorded, semi-structured interview on the topic of breast cancer risk and screening decision-making. Data was analysed thematically.

Results

A total of 24 interviews were conducted, and saturation of the main themes was achieved. Women were classified into one of five groups: don't worry about cancer risk, but do screening; concerned about cancer risk, so do something; concerned about cancer risk, so why don't I do anything?; cancer inevitable; cancer unlikely.

Conclusions

The language and framework women use to describe their risk of breast cancer must be the starting point in attempts to enhance women's understanding of risk and their prevention behaviour.

Family communication matters: the impact of telling relatives about unclassified variants and uninformative DNA-test results

BACKGROUND

Unclassified variant and uninformative BRCA1/2 results are not only relevant for probands to whom results are disclosed but also for untested relatives. Previous studies have seldom included relatives and have not explained how their lives were influenced by these results. We explored the family communication timeline of genetic counseling: (1) genetic counselors communicate the relatives' cancer risk, (2) probands perceive this risk and (3) communicate this to relatives; (4) relatives perceive this information, and (5) experience an impact on their lives.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective descriptive study in 13 probands with an unclassified variant and 5 with an uninformative result, and in, respectively, 27 and 12 of their untested female relatives from moderate cancer risk families. In questionnaires, probands described their perception of the DNA-test result (i.e., recollections and interpretations of cancer risks and heredity likelihood). Relatives described the communication process, their perception, and impact (i.e., medical decisions, distress, quality of life, and life changes). Bootstrap analysis was used to analyze mediation effects.

RESULTS

The relatives' own perception strongly predicted breast self-examination, breast/ovarian surveillance or surgery, levels of distress and quality of life, and amount of reported life changes. The extent to which the proband had communicated the DNA-test result in an understandable, direct, reassuring way, predicted the relatives' perception. The actual communicated relatives' cancer risks or the proband's perception did not predict relatives' perception and impact measures. Family characteristics influenced the communication process but not the relatives' perception and outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Relatives seem to make poorly informed decisions on the basis of their own perception, which was unrelated to the information that probands had communicated on the basis of the actual communicated result. Therefore, genetic counselors may guide probands in the communication process and may directly inform relatives, if possible.

The impact of genetic counseling on knowledge and emotional responses in Spanish population with family history of breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess a genetic counseling intervention measuring the distress, cancer risk perception, anxiety, worry and level of knowledge in people with familial history of breast cancer.

METHODS

One group pre- and post-test design. A total of 212 individuals completed a baseline questionnaire, 88.6% completed a second questionnaire one month later and 75.4% six months later.

RESULTS

Counseling intervention significantly increased the knowledge level of the individuals who received genetic education and significantly decreased the cancer worry levels. Persons with low perception of their cancer risk also had low worry levels. There were no significant changes over time in cancer risk perception or in quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Counseling in a high risk population seems to decrease cancer worry and to increase cancer knowledge thus enabling a counselee to take well-informed decisions. Furthermore, according to our results, such interventions do not increase anxiety and do not modify the quality of life, but do not adjust their cancer risk perception.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Providing individuals at increased risk of breast cancer genetic services seem to enhance their understanding of breast cancer without causing adverse psychological effects or changes in their quality of life, and it could improve their preventive behaviours.

'A low risk is still a risk': exploring women's attitudes towards genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in order to target disease prevention

BACKGROUND

Population breast cancer screening programs by mammography are offered to women based on age. It has been suggested that a screening program based on genetic risk profile could be more effective by targeting interventions at those at higher genetic risk. This study explores women's attitudes towards genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in order to target breast cancer prevention.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted using 4 focus groups with 26 women aged 42-73 years. Women were selected irrespective of personal or family history of breast cancer. Discussions were audiotaped and content analyzed.

RESULTS

The results show that in general women are positive towards a breast cancer screening program based on genetic risk profile, provided that in the low-risk group, though less frequent, women are still offered mammography screening (i.e. right to screening (a)). Other themes that women addressed were: (b) value of the genetic risk information (e.g. possibilities for cancer prevention at younger ages, less screening burden for low-risk women), (c) personal autonomy (e.g. free choice to undergo testing), (d) dealing with test results (e.g. burden of risk, motivation to reduce the risk), (e) discrimination, and (f) financial aspects and priority (e.g. with respect to other health care programs).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that women currently offered breast cancer screening based on age have a positive attitude towards population susceptibility screening for breast cancer, but also identified issues that need to be discussed and studied further, especially if women in the low-risk group were no longer to be offered mammography screening.

Assessing breast cancer risk and providing treatment recommendations: immediate impact of an educational session

The widespread availability of information regarding advancements in breast cancer care has heightened public awareness about risk and prevention, but there is limited knowledge as to the translation of these evolving advancements into physician practice patterns. The purpose of this study was to: (a) determine current practice patterns/treatment recommendations for evaluating patients at high-risk for breast cancer and (b) measure the immediate effect of an educational session on new knowledge acquired for high-risk patients. Five thousand and one health care provider surveys were sent to physicians in the greater Chicago area. The survey inquired about practice patterns and offered an opportunity to attend an educational session utilizing our "Spectrum of Care Options" framework. To evaluate session effectiveness, pre and post-tests were administered to participants. Of 767 survey respondents, 78 attended an educational session, 64 completed a pre and post-test, and 65 completed program evaluations. Pretest scores averaged 67.1% correct (range = 29-100%, SD = 15.8%) while post-test scores averaged 80.3% correct (range = 59-100%, SD = 11.0%), p < 0.0001. Participants rated the following on a 1-5 (poor to excellent) Likert scale (average scores): presentations 4.74, instructional materials 4.58, usefulness to practice 4.60, new knowledge gained 4.71, and likelihood of changing practice 4.49. Primary care physicians and surgeons are interested in identifying and treating high-risk patients, but may lack sufficient state-of-the art knowledge to do so. An educational session providing information on this subject, based on Spectrum of Care Options, significantly improved their knowledge and may influence their future practices.

How risk is perceived, constructed and interpreted by clients in clinical genetics, and the effects on decision making: systematic review

As an individual's understanding of their genetic risk may influence risk management decisions, it is important to understand the ways in which risk is constructed and interpreted. We systematically reviewed the literature, undertaking a narrative synthesis of 59 studies presenting data on the ways in which individuals perceive, construct and interpret their risk, and the subsequent effects. While most studies assessed perceived risk quantitatively, the combined evidence suggests individuals find risk difficult to accurately quantify, with a tendency to overestimate. Rather than being a stand-alone concept, risk is something lived and experienced and the process of constructing risk is complex and influenced by many factors. While evidence of the effects of perceived risk is limited and inconsistent, there is some evidence to suggest high risk estimations may adversely affect health and lead to inappropriate uptake of medical surveillance and preventative measures by some individuals. A more focused approach to research is needed with greater exploration of the ways in which risk is constructed, along with the development of stronger theoretical models, to facilitate effective and patient-centered counseling strategies.

Recall of disclosed apolipoprotein E genotype and lifetime risk estimate for Alzheimer's disease: the REVEAL Study

PURPOSE

To determine whether individuals recall their apolipoprotein E genotype and numeric lifetime risk estimates after undergoing a risk assessment for Alzheimer's disease.

METHODS

One-hundred and four participants underwent Alzheimer's disease risk assessment that included disclosure of apolipoprotein E genotype and a numeric lifetime risk estimate.

RESULTS

At six weeks and one year post-disclosure, 59% and 48% of participants, respectively, recalled their lifetime risk estimate, and 69% and 63% recalled their apolipoprotein E genotype. Participants were more likely to remember their genotype than numeric lifetime risk estimate at one year (P < 0.05). Apolipoprotein E epsilon4-positive participants had better recall of their genotype at both time points (P < 0.05). Participants were more likely to recall whether they carried the "risk-enhancing form of apolipoprotein E" than their specific genotype (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that apolipoprotein E genotype, especially the presence of an epsilon4 allele, is more memorable than a numeric risk estimate for Alzheimer's disease. Participants recalled genotype information in a more simplified, binary form. Health professionals testing for complex disorders such as Alzheimer's disease must find an appropriate balance between communicating risk in an understandable format and addressing the probabilistic nature of the information.

Communication in genetic counselling for breast/ovarian cancer

Cancer genetic counselling represents a very special situation of interaction between the geneticist and the counselee, marked by a number of specificities that account for its complexity. Cancer genetic counselling has multiple repercussions, such as identification of a deleterious genetic mutation associated with a high probability of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer, the implementation of preventive measures ranging from close surveillance to the decision to perform mutilating prophylactic surgical procedures, or the impact of the information on the other members of the counselee's family also concerned by the genetic risk. This chapter is based on a review of the literature that has been rapidly growing over recent years and on our clinical expertise as psycho-oncologists and geneticists. We will first present the reasons that make the information so critical. These reasons are both objective (complexity of the genetic information per se, difficulties of understanding the concept of risk) and subjective (information given to people with an emotionally charged family history and a perception of risks closely linked to their representation of cancer). At the same time, the counsellees are charged with the transmission of this information to members of their own family. We will then discuss the various modalities of communication in this setting. While unidirectional transfer of information from the geneticist to the counselee has been the preferred method in cancer genetics for a long time, a model based on patient-centered communication is more adequate in predictive medicine and allows shared decision making. In all cases, the different professionals involved in the process have to learn how to work in a performing cohesion. We also present the main guidelines on the subject and the various underlying objectives with regard to information delivery and the subject's personal experience. Although the psychological impact of genetic counselling consultations raises a number of questions, the results of preliminary studies are reassuring, demonstrating psychological benefits. However, a number of aspects concerning communication in predictive medicine remain to be investigated and improved.