Subjective interpretation of inconclusive BRCA1/2 cancer genetic test results and transmission of information to the relatives

Experiences of individuals with a variant of uncertain significance on genetic testing for hereditary cancer risks: a mixed method systematic review

The expansion of Multi-Gene Panel Testing (MGPT) has led to increased detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) among individuals with personal or family history of cancer. However, having a VUS result can impact on emotional and psychological wellbeing and cause challenges for non-geneticist healthcare providers. The purpose of this mixed methods systematic review was to examine what is currently known about the experiences of individuals with a VUS on genetic testing for inherited cancer susceptibility. The initial search was conducted in June 2020 using PUBMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsychInfo according to the Joanna Briggs methodology for systematic reviews. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included in this review identified a range of emotional reactions to a VUS result, a general lack of understanding of a VUS result and its implications, frustration with a lack of healthcare provider knowledge, and a need for clear communication with healthcare providers. This review identified critical gaps in current knowledge to guide genetic counseling praxis, specifically in the knowledge of communication patterns and methods of improving communication with healthcare providers and family members and preferred risk management strategies. This will help to improve the counseling process and the management of care during and after genetic testing.

Neglected impacts of patient decision-making associated with genetic testing

We highlight non-health-related impacts associated with genetic testing (GT) and knowing one’s genetic status so that health technology assessment (HTA) analysts and HTA audiences may more appropriately consider the pros and cons of GT. Whereas health-related impacts of GT (e.g., increased healthy behaviors and avoidance of harms of unnecessary treatment) are frequently assessed in HTA, some non-health-related impacts are less often considered and are more difficult to measure. This presents a challenge for accurately assessing whether a genetic test should be funded. In health systems where HTA understandably places emphasis on measurable clinical outcomes, there is a risk of creating a GT culture that is pro-testing without sufficient recognition of the burdens of GT. There is also a risk of not funding a genetic test that provides little clinical benefit but nonetheless may be seen by some as autonomy enhancing. The recent development of expanded HTA frameworks that include ethics analyses helps to address this gap in the evidence and bring awareness to non-health-related impacts of GT. The HTA analyst should be aware of these impacts, choose appropriate frameworks for assessing genetic tests, and use methods for evaluating impacts. A new reporting tool presented here may assist in such evaluations.

The impact of communicating uncertain test results in cancer genetic counseling: A systematic mixed studies review

OBJECTIVE

Cancer genetic counseling increasingly involves discussing uncertain test results, for example because multiple genes are sequenced simultaneously. This review was performed to provide insight into how counselors' communication of uncertain test results during genetic counseling for cancer affects counselors and counselees.

METHODS

A systematic mixed studies review was undertaken to review research on the effects of communicating uncertain test results. Four databases were searched using a PICO search strategy. Study findings of articles meeting the inclusion criteria were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included. Uncertain test results encompassed either an inconclusive test result or a variant of unknown significance (VUS). Counselees involved almost exclusively women at risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer. None of the articles reported effects on counselor outcomes. Counselee outcomes were categorized as cognitive, affective or behavioral. Interpretation of a VUS was overall reported as difficult, and counselees' distress and worry were repeatedly found to decrease over time after the discussion of any uncertain test result. For most other outcomes, findings were sparse and/or inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Evidence on effects on counselee outcomes is scant and inconsistent. Future studies are warranted to provide insight into how counselees and counselors are affected.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinical practice could benefit from guidelines on how to address uncertain test results during pre- and posttest genetic consultations.

Patient experience of uncertainty in cancer genomics: a systematic review

While genomics provides new clinical opportunities, its complexity generates uncertainties. This systematic review aimed to summarize what is currently known about the experience of uncertainty for adult patients undergoing cancer genomic testing. A search of five databases (2001 to 2018) yielded 6508 records. After removing duplicates, abstract/title screening, and assessment of full articles, ten studies were included for quality appraisal and data extraction. Qualitative studies were subjected to thematic analysis, and quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Cancer genomic results reduced uncertainty for patients regarding treatment decisions but did not reduce uncertainty in the risk context. Qualitative and quantitative data synthesis revealed four themes: (1) coexisting uncertainties, (2) factors influencing uncertainty, (3) outcomes of uncertainty, and (4) coping with uncertainty. Uncertainty can motivate, or be a barrier to, pursuing cancer genomic testing. Appraisal of uncertainty influences the patient experience of uncertainty, the outcome of uncertainty for patients, as well as the coping strategies utilized. While this systematic review found that appraisal of uncertainty is important to the patients' experience of uncertainty in the cancer genomic context, more mixed methods longitudinal research is needed to address the complexities that contribute to patient uncertainty across the process.

Female family members lack understanding of indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results shared by probands

Genetic test results have important implications for close family members. Indeterminate negative results are the most common outcome of BRCA1/2 mutation testing. Little is known about family members' understanding of indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to investigate how daughters and sisters received and understood genetic test results as shared by their mothers or sisters. Participants included 81 women aged 40-74 with mothers or sisters previously diagnosed with breast cancer and who received indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results. Participants had never been diagnosed with breast cancer nor received their own genetic testing or counseling. This Institutional Review Board-approved study utilized semi-structured interviews and surveys. Descriptive coding with theme development was used during qualitative analysis. Participants reported low amounts of information shared with them. Most women described test results as negative and incorrectly interpreted the test to mean there was no genetic component to the pattern of cancer in their families. Only seven of 81 women accurately described test results consistent with the meaning of an indeterminate negative. Our findings demonstrate that indeterminate negative genetic test results are not well understood by family members. Lack of understanding may lead to an inability to effectively communicate results to primary care providers and missed opportunities for prevention, screening, and further genetic testing. Future research should evaluate acceptability and feasibility of providing family members letters they can share with their own primary care providers.

Factors affecting breast cancer patients' need for genetic risk information: From information insufficiency to information need

Information-seeking models typically focus on information-seeking behaviors based on individuals' interest in information, because their current level is perceived to be insufficient. In the context of genetic risk information (GRI), however, information insufficiency is difficult to measure and thus can limit understanding of information behavior in the context of GRI. We propose that an individual's need for information might be a more direct and conceptually clearer alternative to predicting their information-seeking behavior. To test this hypothesis, this study investigates the extent to which previously identified factors affecting interest in GRI are also predictors of need for GRI among women diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 40 or younger (N = 1,069). As hypothesized, there was a positive association between interest in and need for GRI. Furthermore, hypothesized factors of numeracy, information orientation, and genetic knowledge were significant predictors of increased interest in and need for GRI. In contrast, hypothesized factors of genetic worry and genetic causal belief predicted increased interest in GRI only, while genetic self-efficacy predicted increased need for GRI only. As hypothesized, BRCA status significantly moderated associations between informational norm and both interest in and need for GRI. Collectively, the findings support inclusion of need for GRI in theoretical information-seeking models in the context of genomic risk.

Lynch Syndrome Limbo: Patient Understanding of Variants of Uncertain Significance

Providers and patients encounter challenges related to the management of Variants of Unknown Significance (VUS). A VUS introduces new counseling dilemmas for the understanding and psychosocial impact of uncertain genetic test results. This descriptive study uses Mishel's theory of uncertainty in illness to explore the experience of individuals who have received a VUS as part of the genetic testing process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 adult individuals who received a VUS for Lynch syndrome mismatch repair genes between 2002 and 2013. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed. Most individuals recalled their result and perceived various types of uncertainty associated with their VUS. Half of the participants appraised their variant as a danger and implemented coping strategies to reduce the threat of developing cancer. Mobilizing strategies to reduce their risk included vigilant cancer surveillance, information seeking and notifying relatives. The majority of participants were unaware of the possibility of a VUS before receiving their result and expected reclassification over time. These results provide insight into the ways healthcare providers can support patients who receive VUS for Lynch syndrome. Findings also provide direction for future work that can further explicate the impact of receiving a VUS.

"Something Extra on Chromosome 5": Parents' Understanding of Positive Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) Results

This study aims to explore how couples' understanding of the nature and consequences of positive prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) results impacts decision-making and concern about pregnancy. We interviewed 28 women and 12 male partners after receiving positive results and analyzed the transcripts to assess their understanding and level of concern about the expected clinical implications of results. Participant descriptions were compared to the original laboratory interpretation. When diagnosed prenatally, couples' understanding of the nature and consequences of copy number variants (CNVs) impacts decision-making and concern. Findings suggest women, but less so partners, generally understand the nature and clinical implications of prenatal CMA results. Couples feel reassured, perhaps sometimes falsely so, when a CNV is inherited from a "normal" parent and experience considerable uncertainty when a CNV is de novo, frequently precipitating a search for additional information and guidance. Five factors influenced participants' concern including: the pattern of inheritance, type of possible phenotypic involvement, perceived manageability of outcomes, availability and strength of evidence about outcomes associated with the CNV, and provider messages about continuing the pregnancy. A good understanding of results is vital as couples decide whether or not to continue with their pregnancy and seek additional information to assist in pregnancy decision-making.

Next-Generation Testing for Cancer Risk: Perceptions, Experiences, and Needs Among Early Adopters in Community Healthcare Settings

BACKGROUND

Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are driving a shift from single-gene to multigene panel testing for clinical genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). This study explored perceptions, experiences, and challenges with NGS testing for GCRA among U.S. community-based clinicians.

METHODS

Surveys delivered at initial and 8-month time points, and 12-month tracking of cases presented in a multidisciplinary web-based case conference series, were conducted with GCRA providers who participated in a 235-member nationwide community of practice.

RESULTS

The proportion of respondents ordering panel tests rose from 29% at initial survey (27/94) to 44% (46/107) within 8 months. Respondents reported significantly less confidence about interpreting and counseling about NGS compared with single-gene test results (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The most cited reasons for not ordering NGS tests included concerns about clinical utility, interpreting and communicating results, and lack of knowledge/skills. Multigene panels were used in 204/668 cases presented during 2013, yielding 37 (18%) deleterious (7% in low/moderate-penetrance genes), 88 (43%) with ≥1 variant of uncertain significance, 77 (38%) uninformative negative, and 2 (1%) inconclusive results.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite concerns about utility and ability to interpret/counsel about NGS results, a rapidly increasing uptake of NGS testing among community clinicians was documented. Challenges identified in case discussions point to the need for ongoing education, practice-based support, and opportunities to partner in research that contributes to characterization of lesser known genes.

Communication Between Breast Cancer Patients Who Received Inconclusive Genetic Test Results and Their Daughters and Sisters Years After Testing

Inconclusive genetic test results including screening recommendations for the breast cancer patients and their first-degree relatives are the most common outcomes of BRCA 1/2 testing. Patients themselves should communicate these results to their relatives. Our aim was to explore communication of breast cancer genetic counseling results with daughters and sisters over a long period of time. Breast cancer patients, who had received an inconclusive DNA test result 7-14 years earlier, completed a self-report questionnaire. Additionally, in-depth interviews were conducted and analysed thematically. Of the 93 respondents, 85 (91 %) considered themselves responsible for communicating genetic test results to relatives. In-depth interviews (n = 14) showed, that counselees wanted 'to hand over' their responsibilities to communicate the test results and screening recommendations to their sisters. Although most patients had informed their daughters and sisters about the genetic test results, usually little is spoken about genetic test results and screening recommendations once the duty of informing is completed. We recommend that, similar to the procedure for BRCA1/2-mutation carriers, a separate letter for first-degree relatives of patients with an inconclusive test result should be provided. In this way information about risks and screening recommendations can be verified by family members years after genetic testing has been completed.

Pilot Testing of a Psycho-educational Telephone Intervention for Women Receiving Uninformative BRCA1/2 Genetic Test Results

Evidence suggests that women who receive uninformative results for breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA1/2) gene mutations may experience as much distress as women whose results indicate the presence of a gene mutation. No intervention to reduce distress after receipt of uninformative results has yet been tested. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and preliminary effects of a psycho-educational telephone (PET) intervention to reduce distress in women who receive uninformative BRCA1/2 results. A single group with repeated measures was used to assess the impact of the intervention on 72 such women. After receiving the results, most of the women continued to feel uncertain about their carrier genetic status. However, their distress significantly decreased between receipt of uninformative results and 3 months post-intervention (p = 0.01). The preliminary findings suggest that a PET uncertainty intervention is clinically feasible and may reduce the distress of receiving uninformative results.

Systematic review of educational tools used during the BRCA1/2 genetic testing process

This review describes the characteristics of available educational tools used for BRCA1/2 genetic testing. To identify the tools, we conducted a systematic search in electronic databases, and contacted over 1000 cancer genetics professionals. This review is based on 68 tools from the USA, Canada, Australia, the UK, France and Ireland. The tools vary in format and scope depending on the genetic testing phase for which they are intended. We found that a wide diversity of educational materials are available and used for BRCA1/2 genetic testing around the world. However, a substantial number of tools fail to address important aspects of genetic testing.

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.

Do Breast Cancer Patients Tested in the Oncology Care Setting Share BRCA Mutation Results with Family Members and Health Care Providers?

BRCA genetic test results provide important information to manage cancer risk for patients and their families. Little is known on the communication of genetic test results by mutation status with family members and physicians in the oncology care setting. As part of a longitudinal study evaluating the impact of genetic counseling and testing among recently diagnosed breast cancer patients, we collected patients' self-reported patterns of disclosure. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample and determined the prevalence of disclosure of BRCA test results to family members and physicians. Of 100 patients who completed the baseline and the 6-month followup survey, 77 reported pursuing testing. The majority shared test results with female first-degree relatives; fewer did with males. Participants were more likely to share results with oncologists compared to surgeons, primary care physicians, or other specialty physicians. These findings suggest that while breast cancer patients may communicate results to at-risk female family members and their medical oncologist, they may need education and support to facilitate communication to other first-degree relatives and providers.

[Cognitive, emotional and behavioral impact of an uncertain outcome after study of BRCA1/2: review of the literature]

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in oncogenetics have enabled the development of tests for predisposition to breast and ovarian cancers. Where no mutation has been identified in the BRCA1 or 2 genes, the proband (first person tested in a family with a genetic risk) can receive an uncertain outcome: negative inconclusive or identification of a variant of unknown clinical significance. From the demonstration of such outcomes, their psychological impact has been studied among women concerned.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to summarize the results of studies about the impact of delivering an uncertain BRCA1/2 genetic result on emotional (general or cancer specific distress), cognitive (perception of risk) and behavioral (decisions of medical care) reactions of consultants. It is also to identify factors particularly associated with personal or familial medical history that may alter this impact.

METHODOLOGY

A literature review was conducted from a key word search on the databases PsycINFO and PubMed (breast*, BRCA*, genetic*, familial, mutation, heredit*) crossed with terms related to the psychological impact and mutation status. Included papers are quantitative studies focused on the psychological impact of the uncertain genetic test result, compared to the impact resulting from positive or true negative result, or from test refusal.

RESULTS

The results of the eight selected articles generally suggest a less emotional distress and a lower perceived risk of predisposition or to develop cancer facing uncertain genetic result compared to positive result. Intentions of breast cancer surveillance are optimal, indicating the absence of "false reassurance", while demand for prophylactic surgery appears to be less frequent. Nevertheless risk factors of inappropriate psychological reactions may be highlighted as pretest clinical distress, a personal cancer history or multiple family history of cancer.

CONCLUSION

Current data suggest psychological reactions adapted to the clinical significance of uncertain genetic test results. These findings are preliminary given the small number of studies and their restriction to populations with similar sociocultural characteristics.

Disclosing cancer genetic information within families: perspectives of counselees and their at-risk relatives

PURPOSE

The aim of the present descriptive study was to investigate the experience of sharing genetic information among cancer genetic counselees and their at-risk relatives.

METHODS

In total, 147 cancer genetic counselees and 81 of their at-risk relatives answered to a study specific questionnaire and/or were interviewed. Counselees' communication of genetic information to at-risk relatives was assessed with regard to who they informed, how they felt, and how they perceived their relatives' reactions. In addition, at-risk relatives' experiences of receiving genetic information were studied.

RESULTS

Most of the counselees had shared the genetic information received at the counseling session personally with their at-risk relatives. The majority of the counselees (68%) reported positive or neutral feelings about sharing the genetic information with their relatives while 9% stated negative feelings. Counselees mostly interpreted the relatives' reactions to the information as positive or neutral (62% of responses), and in few cases as negative (14% of responses). About half of relatives reported positive or neutral reactions (54%) to the received information, while about one-fifth reported negative reactions (22%). Nevertheless, most relatives were satisfied with the received information and half of the relatives intended to seek genetic counseling themselves.

CONCLUSION

Sharing genetic information to at-risk relatives appears to be accomplished without any major difficulties or negative feelings. However, more assistance may be needed to optimize the communication of the genetic information within at-risk families.

Is no news good news? Inconclusive genetic test results in BRCA1 and BRCA2 from patients and professionals' perspectives

Background

Women from families with a high risk of breast or ovarian cancer in which genetic testing for mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes is inconclusive are a vulnerable and understudied group. Furthermore, there are no studies of the professional specialists who treat them - geneticists, genetic counsellors/nurses, oncologists, gynaecologists and breast surgeons.

Methods

We conducted a small qualitative study that investigated women who had developed breast cancer under the age of 45 and who had an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic diagnostic test (where no mutations or unclassified variants were identified). We arranged three focus groups for affected women and their close female relatives - 13 women took part. We also interviewed 12 health professionals who were involved in the care of these women.

Results

The majority of the women had a good grasp of the meaning of their own or a family member's inconclusive result, but a few indicated some misunderstanding. Most of the women in this study underwent the test for the benefit of others in the family and none mentioned that they were having the test purely for themselves. A difficult issue for sisters of affected women was whether or not to undertake prophylactic breast surgery. The professionals were sensitive to the difficulties in explaining an inconclusive result. Some felt frustrated that technology had not as yet provided them with a better tool for prediction of risk.

Conclusions

Some of the women were left with the dilemma of what decision to make regarding medical management of their cancer risk. For the most part, the professionals believed that the women should be supported in whatever management decisions they considered best, provided these decisions were based on a complete and accurate understanding of the genetic test that had taken place in the family.