A literature review of the psychological impact of genetic testing on breast cancer patients

The dynamic buffering of social support on depressive symptoms and cancer worries in patients seeking cancer genetic counseling

PURPOSE

Social support is a crucial protective factor against psychological concerns in patients with cancer. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the differential impacts of social support on cancer worries and depressive symptoms in patients undergoing genetic counseling for hereditary cancer. The current study utilized a high-volume database from a multi-site cancer genetics clinic to assess the impact of perceived social support on depressive symptoms and cancer worries among patients of different age groups (young versus older patients) and diagnosis status (diagnosed survivors versus undiagnosed).

METHODS

6,666 patients completed brief assessments of depressive symptoms, cancer worries, social support, and demographic questionnaires as part of routine clinical care between October 2016 and October 2020. Logistics and moderated regression were used to analyze the relationships between social support, depressive symptoms, and cancer worries.

RESULTS

Increased social support was associated with fewer depressive symptoms and fewer cancer worries across all patients. Social support mitigated depressive symptoms most significantly for young adult patients with and without cancer. Social support mitigated cancer worries most significantly for young adults with cancer and older adults without cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

While results were mixed, general findings upheld original hypotheses. Social support buffered depressive symptoms and cancer worries differentially for patients of different ages and different disease status.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Social support groups are beneficial for all patients and should be emphasized by cancer clinics. However, increasing patient-tailored and age-appropriate support networks will be crucial for managing depression and cancer worries for high-risk survivors: young adults with cancer.

The Evolution of Genetic Testing from Focused Testing to Panel Testing and from Patient Focused to Population Testing: Are We There Yet?

The field of cancer genetics has evolved significantly over the past 30 years. Genetic testing has become less expensive and more comprehensive which has changed practice patterns. It is no longer necessary to restrict testing to those with the highest likelihood of testing positive. In addition, we have learned that the criteria developed to determine who has the highest likelihood of testing positive are neither sensitive nor specific. As a result, the field is moving from testing only the highest risk patients identified based on testing criteria to testing all cancer patients. This requires new service delivery models where testing can be mainstreamed into oncology clinics and posttest genetic counseling can be provided to individuals who test positive and those with concerning personal or family histories who test negative. The use of videos, testing kiosks, chatbots, and genetic counseling assistants have been employed to help facilitate testing at a larger scale and have good patient uptake and satisfaction. While testing is important for cancer patients as it may impact their treatment, future cancer risks, and family member's cancer risks, it is unfortunate that their cancer could not be prevented in the first place. Population testing for all adults would be a strategy to identify individuals with adult-onset diseases before they develop cancer in an attempt to prevent it entirely. A few research studies (Healthy Nevada and MyCode) have offered population testing for the three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 conditions: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia finding a prevalence of 1 in 70 individuals in the general population. We anticipate that testing for all cancer patients and the general population will continue to increase over the next 20 years and the genetics community needs to help lead the way to ensure this happens in a responsible manner.

The ENGAGE study: a 3-arm randomized hybrid type 1 effectiveness and implementation study of an in-home, collaborative PCP model of remote telegenetic services to increase uptake of cancer genetic services in childhood cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Germline cancer genetic testing has become a standard evidence-based practice, with established risk reduction and screening guidelines for genetic carriers. Access to genetic services is limited in many places, which leaves many genetic carriers unidentified and at risk for late diagnosis of cancers and poor outcomes. This poses a problem for childhood cancer survivors, as this is a population with an increased risk for subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMN) due to cancer therapy or inherited cancer predisposition. The ENGaging and Activating cancer survivors in Genetic services (ENGAGE) study evaluates the effectiveness of an in-home, collaborative PCP model of remote telegenetic services to increase uptake of cancer genetic testing in childhood cancer survivors compared to usual care options for genetic testing.

METHODS

The ENGAGE study is a 3-arm randomized hybrid type 1 effectiveness and implementation study within the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study population which tests a clinical intervention while gathering information on its delivery during the effectiveness trial and its potential for future implementation among 360 participants. Participants are randomized into three arms. Those randomized to Arm A receive genetic services via videoconferencing, those in Arm B receive these services by phone, and those randomized to Arm C will receive usual care services.

DISCUSSION

With many barriers to accessing genetic services, innovative delivery models are needed to address this gap and increase uptake of genetic services. The ENGAGE study evaluates the effectiveness of an adapted model of remote delivery of genetic services to increase the uptake of recommended genetic testing in childhood cancer survivors. This study assesses the uptake in remote genetic services and identify barriers to uptake to inform future recommendations and a theoretically-informed process evaluation which can inform modifications to enhance dissemination beyond this study population and to realize the benefits of precision medicine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04455698) on July 2, 2020.

Assessing patient attitudes toward genetic testing for hereditary hematologic malignancy

Since 2003, more than 15 genes have been identified to predispose to hereditary hematologic malignancy (HHM). Although the yield of germline analysis for leukemia appears like that of solid tumors, genetic referrals in adults with leukemia remain underperformed. We assessed leukemia patients' attitudes toward genetic testing and leukemia-related distress through a survey of 1093 patients diagnosed with acute or chronic leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, or aplastic anemia. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to analyze patient attitudes. Distress was measured through the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). Exactly 19.8% of eligible respondents completed the survey. The majority reported interest in (77%) or choosing to have (78%) genetic testing for HHM. Slightly over half identified worry about cost of genetic testing (58%) or health insurance coverage (61%) as possible barriers. PCA identified relevant themes of interest in genetic testing, impact on leukemia treatment, discrimination and confidentiality, psychosocial and familial impacts, and cost of testing. The majority reported low distress. Leukemia patients report high interest in genetic testing, few barriers, and relatively low distress.

What happens in the long term: Uptake of cancer surveillance and prevention strategies among at-risk relatives with pathogenic variants detected via cascade testing

BACKGROUND

Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes offers affected relatives the opportunity to pursue cancer screening and risk-reducing surgery and thus reduces morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to measure the long-term utilization of targeted cancer prevention and quality of life among at-risk relatives offered clinician-facilitated cascade genetic testing.

METHODS

In a pilot study, at-risk relatives of patients with a hereditary cancer syndrome were contacted directly by the clinical team and offered telephone genetic counseling and genetic testing via an at-home, mailed saliva kit. Two-year follow-up results evaluating the use of targeted cancer prevention strategies and the quality of life for enrolled relatives were reported. Quality-of-life was measured with validated surveys, and scores were compared to the time of initial contact by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

Ninety-five at-risk relatives were enrolled in the initial pilot study, and 72 (76%) participated in the 2-year follow-up; 57 of these (79%) had completed genetic testing. Twenty-five of those 57 relatives (44%) were found to harbor an inherited pathogenic variant. Guideline-based cancer surveillance was recommended to 18 relatives; 13 (72%) completed at least one recommended screening, and six (33%) completed all recommended screenings. Risk-reducing surgery was recommended to 10 relatives; four (40%) completed a total of eight procedures. Quality-of-life surveys demonstrated low levels of anxiety, depression, distress, and uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2-year follow-up of the original pilot study revealed that clinician-facilitated cascade testing resulted in genetically targeted cancer screening and prevention with preserved quality of life. These results, to be confirmed by larger randomized controlled trials, suggest that medical systems should consider supporting clinician-facilitated cascade testing programs.

Uncertainty following an inconclusive result from the BRCA1/2 genetic test: A review about psychological outcomes

BACKGROUND

An inconclusive result from BRCA1/2 genetic testing indicates that a genetic variant of uncertain significance is detected. This case constitutes the majority of genetic test results, but studies specifically addressing the psychological adjustment of people with inconclusive results are scarce.

AIM

To examine psychological outcomes of receiving an uninformative BRCA1/2 test result.

METHODS

PubMed, PsychInfo, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were screened for studies focusing on distress, anxiety, and depression levels in individuals with inconclusive genetic test results. This review is based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method.

RESULTS

Studies on psychological outcomes of inconclusive BRCA1/2 focused on general and specific distress, anxiety, and depression. Overall, they produced mixed results. These inconsistent findings are probably due to the uncertainty caused by this type of result, that may also influence the decisions of individuals about surveillance and prophylactic options, reducing their compliance. In addition, this review highlights specific risk and protective factors that affect psychological adjustment in individuals with an inconclusive genetic testing result.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with inconclusive genetic test results need specific educational programs and support to better understand the meaning of their results in order to be able to make decisions about surveillance and prophylactic options.

Outcomes of genetic test disclosure and genetic counseling in a large Parkinson's disease research study

Genetic testing for Parkinson's disease (PD) is growing as interventional clinical trials begin to enroll participants with PD who carry pathogenic variants in the LRRK2 or GBA genes. However, the impact of receiving genetic test results and the satisfaction with receiving genetic counseling among PD populations have not yet been studied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate (1) the psychological impact of genetic testing for PD and (2) satisfaction with genetic counseling. Surveyed participants (N = 875) were individuals with PD or at risk of developing PD, initially recruited for the Parkinson's Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) study and currently enrolled in the Widespread Recruitment Initiative (WRI) at Indiana University. Individuals were surveyed following genetic test disclosure and genetic counseling regarding results from targeted testing for pathogenic variants in the LRRK2 and GBA genes. Participants were surveyed via two tools: a modified version of the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment Survey (M-MICRA), which measured the psychological impact of genetic testing and the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Survey (GCSS). Participants were divided into affected/unaffected and variant positive/negative groups for subset analyses. The majority of participants had favorable M-MICRA scores and were satisfied with the disclosure of the genetic test results and genetic counseling for PD. However, participants with PD and those with pathogenic variants had less favorable M-MICRA scores and lower satisfaction scores compared to those without disease or pathogenic variants. This information is valuable to providers performing genetic testing of and genetic counseling to people and families affected with PD. Individuals with PD and individuals with pathogenic variants may benefit from additional interventions.

Expectations and psychological issues before genetic counseling: analysis of distress determinant factors

BACKGROUND

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) and Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (HBOC) are the most common hereditary cancer syndromes in which a genetic test is available. Potential risks associated with testing include psychological harm, emotional distress and insurance problems.

METHODS

The aim of the present study is to investigate determinants of distress in a sample of Italian subjects undergoing genetic counseling. Demographic information and psychological distress were assessed by using a self-reported questionnaire and the "Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale" (HAD), before attending the first counseling session.

RESULTS

Of the all subjects referred for the first time to our Center (January 2012-June 2013), a total of 227 were eligible (female/male = 174/53) for the survey, 134 (59%) were oncologic patients and of these, 116 received genetic test (36 for HNPCC and 80 for HBOC). The remaining 93 (41%) were healthy subjects referred for suspected familiar history and of this group, 65 subjects performed predictive test in a family with a known pathogenic mutation (53 for HBOC and 12 for HNPCC). Affected subjects had a significantly higher level of anxiety (p = 0.02) and HAD global score (p = 0.01) than healthy ones. There was no difference in HAD score between individuals testing for different syndromes (p = 0.3). In the affected subgroup, there was a significant linear correlation between the HAD anxiety score and how much subjects perceived their disease as hereditary (p = 0.01). Female and younger subjects had higher levels of anxiety (p = 0.05). Also healthy single subjects show more general distress (p = 0.02) than those with a partner.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater level of distress identified on females, single and younger subjects.

Facilitated referral pathway for genetic testing at the time of ovarian cancer diagnosis: uptake of genetic counseling and testing and impact on patient-reported stress, anxiety and depression

BACKGROUND

Timely genetic testing at ovarian cancer diagnosis is essential as results impact front line treatment decisions. Our objective was to determine rates of genetic counseling and testing with an expedited genetics referral pathway wherein women with newly-diagnosed ovarian cancer are contacted by a genetics navigator to facilitate genetic counseling.

METHODS

Patients were referred for genetic counseling by their gynecologic oncologist, contacted by a genetics navigator and offered appointments for genetic counseling. Patients completed quality of life (QoL) surveys immediately pre- and post-genetic assessment and 6 months later. The primary outcome was feasibility of this pathway defined by presentation for genetic counseling.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2018, 100 patients were enrolled. Seventy-eight had genetic counseling and 73 testing. Median time from diagnosis to genetic counseling was 34 days (range 10-189). Among patients who underwent testing, 12 (16%) had pathogenic germline mutations (BRCA1-7, BRCA2-4, MSH2-1). Sixty-five patients completed QoL assessments demonstrating stress and anxiety at time of testing, however, scores improved at 6 months. Despite the pathway leveling financial and logistical barriers, patients receiving care at a public hospital were less likely to present for genetic counseling compared to private hospital patients (56% versus 84%, P = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Facilitated referral to genetic counselors at time of ovarian cancer diagnosis is effective, resulting in high uptake of genetic counseling and testing, and does not demonstrate a long term psychologic toll. Concern about causing additional emotional distress should not deter clinicians from early genetics referral as genetic testing can yield important prognostic and therapeutic information.

Psychological aspects, risk and protective factors related to BRCA genetic testing: a review of the literature

PURPOSE

The primary aim of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of short-, intermediate- and long-term psychological effects, such as anxiety, depression and distress, on individuals undergoing genetic testing to determine BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation. The different instruments used for the measurement of each construct were reported. In addition, risk and protective factors associated with psychological outcomes of genetic tests were explored.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases were searched for studies published over the period 1998-2018. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method, 21 articles were selected for the current review.

RESULTS

Overall, the collected data revealed rather diverse results, although most studies reported higher levels of distress, anxiety and depression in carriers, as compared to non-carriers. The two genders were not equally represented, with men constituting only 6% of the sample. Risk factors and protective factors that may influence psychological outcomes and adjustment to genetic tests are highlighted and discussed in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased risk of developing cancer associated with positive genetic testing results may be experienced as traumatic by many patients, although not all individuals with positive genetic testing results will experience increased distress. Hence, future studies should consider specific risk factors in order to select those who are more likely to be in need of psychological support. Finally, it is necessary to increase the number of male samples to better understand the male experience related to genetic testing outcomes.

Psychosocial Effects of Multigene Panel Testing in the Context of Cancer Genomics

In recent years, with both the development of next-generation sequencing approaches and the Supreme Court decision invalidating gene patents, declining costs have contributed to the emergence of a new model of hereditary cancer genetic testing. Multigene panel testing (or multiplex testing) involves using next-generation sequencing technology to determine the sequence of multiple cancer-susceptibility genes. In addition to high-penetrance cancer-susceptibility genes, multigene panels frequently include genes that are less robustly associated with cancer predisposition. Scientific understanding about associations between many specific moderate-penetrance gene variants and cancer risks is incomplete. The emergence of multigene panel tests has created unique challenges that may have meaningful psychosocial implications. Contrasted with the serial testing process, wherein patients consider the personal and clinical implications of each evaluated gene, with multigene panel testing, patients provide broad consent to whichever genes are included in a particular panel and then, after the test, receive in-depth genetic counseling to clarify the distinct implications of their specific results. Consequently, patients undergoing multigene panel testing may have a less nuanced understanding of the test and its implications, and they may have fewer opportunities to self-select against the receipt of particular types of genetic-risk information. Evidence is conflicting regarding the emotional effects of this testing.

Emotional impact on the results of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test: an observational retrospective study

Background

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are associated with a higher risk of breast and ovarian tumors. This study evaluated the emotional states of women 1 month after having received the results of the genetic test and assessed eventual associations with the type of outcome, personal/familiar disease history and major socio-demographic variables.

Methods

The study, an observational retrospective one, involved 91 women, evaluated 1 month after receiving their results. Patients were administered the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Profile of Mood States and emotional Thermometers.

Results

Anxiety was significantly higher than depression (p < 0.001), and 21.3% and 21.3% of the sample were, respectively, possible and probable cases for anxiety, whereas 13.5% and 10.1% were possible and probable cases for depression. Within the six mood states, Confusion-Bewilderment (M = 48.5) was the lowest, whereas Fatigue-Inertia (M = 52.3) was the highest. Differences were recorded within the ten assessed emotions too. Being a proband/nonproband and being or not a cancer patient were associated with many tested variables.

Conclusion

The psycho-emotional screening of women undertaking genetic counseling is relevant and should cover a large range of dimensions.

Psychosocial outcomes and counselee satisfaction following genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: A patient-reported outcome study

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the psychosocial consequences of genetic counseling and testing (GCT) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) at follow-up in a "real-life" sample of counselees at an Austrian tertiary care center.

METHODS

The study cohort included counselees who had undergone genetic counseling for HBOC and completed a follow-up self-report questionnaire battery on psychosocial outcomes (quality of life, psychological distress, satisfaction with counseling and decisions). For comparison of distress, we recruited a reference sample of breast cancer survivors (BCS; n=665) who had not requested GCT in the same setting.

RESULTS

Overall, counselees did not exhibit increased levels of anxiety and depression when compared to BCS. No specific follow-up deleterious psychosocial consequences were detected among the former group. Of the 137 counselees, 22.6% and 9.8% experienced clinically relevant levels of anxiety and depression, respectively, at an average follow-up time of 1.8years. However, both anxiety and depression significantly decreased with time and were alike between counselees with and without cancer diagnosis. Follow-up cancer worry seems to be significantly higher among counselees who had not undergone genetic testing or were undecided about it than among counselees who had been tested.

CONCLUSION

Our results strongly support GCT as part of routine care for patients with HBOC. The risk factors of increased distress in specific subgroups of counselees, such as recent cancer diagnosis or uncertainty about testing, warrant further exploration and specific attention in clinical routines. Particularly, the psychological needs of undecided counselees warrant ongoing attention and potential follow-ups.

Parental Decision Making Regarding the Disclosure or Nondisclosure of a Mutation-Positive BRCA1/2 Test Result to Minors

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To gain insight into parental decision making regarding the disclosure or nondisclosure of a mutation-positive BRCA1/2 test result to minors.
.

RESEARCH APPROACH

A qualitative study based on Heidegger hermeneutic phenomenology was undertaken to explore the lived experience of parental decision making regarding high-risk BRCA1/2 disclosure.
.

SETTING

The study's recruitment site was a western Canadian hereditary breast and ovarian cancer clinic.
.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen female mutation-positive BRCA1/2 carriers who had at least one child aged 6-18 years.
.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

The use of a demographic questionnaire, semistructured interviews, and conversation summaries were employed to gain an understanding of participants' lived experience. van Manen's selective approach was used to conduct a thematic analysis.
.

FINDINGS

Collectively, parents wanted clinicians to discuss implications of disclosing and not disclosing a mutation-positive BRCA1/2 test result to minors in greater detail. The findings were categorized under the following emergent themes.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants' stories identified the need for auxiliary support pertaining to the decision-making process and suggested ways in which parental support may be coordinated.
.

INTERPRETATION

Oncology nurses with advanced genetics training should assist mutation-positive BRCA1/2 carriers in meeting their genetic risk information needs; this requires nurses to stay informed about a multitude of issues that affect this population of patients.

Psychological Distress, Anxiety, and Depression of Cancer-Affected BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: a Systematic Review

Understanding the intermediate- and long-term psychological consequences of genetic testing for cancer patients has led to encouraging research, but a clear consensus of the psychosocial impact and clinical routine for cancer-affected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is still missing. We performed a systematic review of intermediate- and long-term studies investigating the psychological impact like psychological distress, anxiety, and depression in cancer-affected BRCA mutation carriers compared to unaffected mutation carriers. This review included the screening of 1243 studies. Eight intermediate- and long-term studies focusing on distress, anxiety, and depression symptoms among cancer-affected mutation carriers at least six months after the disclosure of genetic testing results were included. Studies reported a great variety of designs, methods, and patient outcomes. We found evidence indicating that cancer-affected mutation carriers experienced a negative effect in relation to psychological well-being in terms of an increase in symptoms of distress, anxiety, and depression in the first months after test disclosure. In the intermediate- and long-term, no significant clinical relevant symptoms occurred. However, none of the included studies used specific measurements, which can clearly identify psychological burdens of cancer-affected mutation carriers. We concluded that current well-implemented distress screening instruments are not sufficient for precisely identifying the psychological burden of genetic testing. Therefore, future studies should implement coping strategies, specific personality structures, the impact of genetic testing, supportive care needs and disease management behaviour to clearly screen for the possible intermediate- and long-term psychological impact of a positive test disclosure.

Genetic screening for gynecological cancer: where are we heading?

The landscape of cancer genetics in gynecological oncology is rapidly changing. The traditional family history-based approach has limitations and misses >50% mutation carriers. This is now being replaced by population-based approaches. The need for changing the clinical paradigm from family history-based to population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in Ashkenazi Jews is supported by data that demonstrate population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing does not cause psychological harm and is cost effective. This article covers various genetic testing strategies for gynecological cancers, including population-based approaches, panel and direct-to-consumer testing as well as the need for innovative approaches to genetic counseling. Advances in genetic testing technology and computational analytics have facilitated an integrated systems medicine approach, providing increasing potential for population-based genetic testing, risk stratification, and cancer prevention. Genomic information along-with biological/computational tools will be used to deliver predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory (P4) and precision medicine in the future.

A family history questionnaire improves detection of women at risk for hereditary gynecologic cancer: a pilot study

Pilot study to evaluate whether the use of a standardized questionnaire to document family history of cancer improves identification of women who warrant referral to cancer genetic services (CGS) for increased risk of hereditary cancer, compared to their identification in usual care. Prospective intervention study with historic control group. Gynecology outpatient clinic, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands. The prospective intervention group consisted of new outpatients between June 1 and August 1, 2011. The historic control group consisted of new outpatients between May 1, 2009 and April 30, 2010. A standardized questionnaire based on established referral criteria for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome was completed for the intervention group. The referral rate in routine consultation, based on non-standardized family history recording, was determined retrospectively for the control group. The difference in referral rate between intervention and control group, tested by Chi square test. In the control group, 8 of 3,036 women (0.26 %) were referred to CGS. In the intervention group, 209 (42 %) of 500 screening questionnaires were completed. Nineteen women (9, 1 %) met the referral guidelines, of which 5 were newly referred to CGS (2, 4 %). Referral rates differed significantly (p < 0.001) between the two groups. This pilot study shows that the routine use of a screening questionnaire may improve detection and referral rate to CGS of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer. Improving genetic literacy of physicians and use of web-site questionnaires deserve attention in future studies.

Population testing for cancer predisposing BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations in the Ashkenazi-Jewish community: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Technological advances raise the possibility of systematic population-based genetic testing for cancer-predisposing mutations, but it is uncertain whether benefits outweigh disadvantages. We directly compared the psychological/quality-of-life consequences of such an approach to family history (FH)-based testing.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial of BRCA1/2 gene-mutation testing in the Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population, we compared testing all participants in the population screening (PS) arm with testing those fulfilling standard FH-based clinical criteria (FH arm). Following a targeted community campaign, AJ participants older than 18 years were recruited by self-referral after pretest genetic counseling. The effects of BRCA1/2 genetic testing on acceptability, psychological impact, and quality-of-life measures were assessed by random effects regression analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

One thousand, one hundred sixty-eight AJ individuals were counseled, 1042 consented, 1034 were randomly assigned (691 women, 343 men), and 1017 were eligible for analysis. Mean age was 54.3 (SD = 14.66) years. Thirteen BRCA1/2 carriers were identified in the PS arm, nine in the FH arm. Five more carriers were detected among FH-negative FH-arm participants following study completion. There were no statistically significant differences between the FH and PS arms at seven days or three months on measures of anxiety, depression, health anxiety, distress, uncertainty, and quality-of-life. Contrast tests indicated that overall anxiety (P = .0001) and uncertainty (P = .005) associated with genetic testing decreased; positive experience scores increased (P = .0001); quality-of-life and health anxiety did not change with time. Overall, 56% of carriers did not fulfill clinical criteria for genetic testing, and the BRCA1/2 prevalence was 2.45%.

CONCLUSION

Compared with FH-based testing, population-based genetic testing in Ashkenazi Jews doesn't adversely affect short-term psychological/quality-of-life outcomes and may detect 56% additional BRCA carriers.

Development of a communication protocol for telephone disclosure of genetic test results for cancer predisposition

Background

Dissemination of genetic testing for disease susceptibility, one application of “personalized medicine”, holds the potential to empower patients and providers through informed risk reduction and prevention recommendations. Genetic testing has become a standard practice in cancer prevention for high-risk populations. Heightened consumer awareness of “cancer genes” and genes for other diseases (eg, cardiovascular and Alzheimer’s disease), as well as the burgeoning availability of increasingly complex genomic tests (ie, multi-gene, whole-exome and -genome sequencing), has escalated interest in and demand for genetic risk assessment and the specialists who provide it. Increasing demand is expected to surpass access to genetic specialists. Thus, there is urgent need to develop effective and efficient models of delivery of genetic information that comparably balance the risks and benefits to the current standard of in-person communication.

Objective

The aim of this pilot study was to develop and evaluate a theoretically grounded and rigorously developed protocol for telephone communication of BRCA1/2 (breast cancer) test results that might be generalizable to genetic testing for other hereditary cancer and noncancer syndromes.

Methods

Stakeholder data, health communication literature, and our theoretical model grounded in Self-Regulation Theory of Health Behavior were used to develop a telephone communication protocol for the communication of BRCA1/2 genetic test results. Framework analysis of selected audiotapes of disclosure sessions and stakeholders’ feedback were utilized to evaluate the efficacy and inform refinements to this protocol.

Results

Stakeholder feedback (n=86) and audiotapes (38%, 33/86) of telephone disclosures revealed perceived disadvantages and challenges including environmental factors (eg, non-private environment), patient-related factors (eg, low health literacy), testing-related factors (eg, additional testing needed), and communication factors (eg, no visual cues). Resulting modifications to the communication protocol for BRCA1/2 test results included clarified patient instructions, scheduled appointments, refined visual aids, expanded disclosure checklist items, and enhanced provider training.

Conclusions

Analyses of stakeholders’ experiences and audiotapes of telephone disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results informed revisions to communication strategies and a protocol to enhance patient outcomes when utilizing telephone to disclose genetic test results.

Patient experiences with gene panels based on exome sequencing in clinical diagnostics: high acceptance and low distress

The Radboud University Medical Center was among the first to implement two-step exome sequencing in clinical genetic diagnostics. This study is the first to evaluate patient experiences with gene panels based on exome sequencing, using quantified psychological variables: acceptance, psychological distress, expectations of heredity and unsolicited findings. Between August 2011 and July 2012, 177 patients diagnosed with early-onset colorectal/kidney cancer, deafness, blindness or movement disorder consented to diagnostic exome sequencing offered by clinical geneticists. Baseline questionnaires were sent to 141 adults, returned by 111 with median age of 49 [22-79] years and positive family history in 81%. Follow-up included 91 responders at median 4 [2-22] weeks after results from known gene panels per diagnosis group; exome-wide analysis is ongoing. Confirmed or possibly pathogenic mutations were found in 31% with one unsolicited finding (oncogenetic panel). Most patients (92%) were satisfied. There were no significant changes in heredity-specific distress (18% at baseline, 17% at follow-up) and expectations of heredity. Fewer patients expected unsolicited findings at follow-up (29% vs 18%, p = 0.01). Satisfaction and distress were equal in those with vs without mutations. In conclusion, most adults accepted and were satisfied with gene panels based on diagnostic exome sequencing, few reporting distress.

Preoperative genetic testing affects surgical decision making in breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to determine if BRCA mutation status changes surgical decision making in women who undergo genetic testing after the diagnosis of breast cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of breast cancer patients who had BRCA mutation testing performed prior to surgery. We compared surgical choice and change in surgical choice in women who tested positive for a BRCA mutation with those who tested negative. Surgery was considered the most definitive surgery within a year of diagnosis. Other data collected included age, race, stage, histology, receptor status, adjuvant treatment, gravity, parity, and family history. Variables were compared by BRCA status using Fisher's exact test and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Three hundred and two women were included. Thirty-two (10.6%) were identified as carrying a BRCA mutation. Most women had early stage disease (55.6% T1 lesions, 72.8% node negative); 55.6% had breast-conserving surgery, and the remaining had unilateral or bilateral mastectomy. BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to have both a personal history of breast cancer (RR 2.74, 95% CI=1.08-6.98) and hormone receptor-negative tumors (56.0% vs. 26.2%, p=0.002). BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to choose bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction (56.3% vs. 15.9%, p<0.0001); 71.9% of BRCA mutation carriers opted for a different surgery than what was initially planned by their surgeon as compared to 29% of mutation-negative patients (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA mutation testing strongly influences surgical decision making in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. For women who meet NCCN referral guidelines, genetic evaluation should be performed prior to surgical intervention.

Maximising survival: the main concern of women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer who undergo genetic testing for BRCA1/2

PURPOSE

Little is known about how women with hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer who test positive for a BRCA gene manage the impact of a positive test result on their everyday lives and in the longer term. This study defined the experience and needs of women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and a positive BRCA test over time.

METHODS

A grounded theory approach was taken using qualitative interviews (n = 49) and reflective diaries. Data collected from December 2006 until March 2010 was analysed using the constant comparative technique to trace the development of how women manage their concerns of inherited cancer.

RESULTS

A four stage substantive theory of maximising survival was generated that defines the experience of women and how they resolve their main concerns. The process of maximising survival begins prior to genetic testing in women from high risk families as they expect to get a cancer diagnosis at some time. Women with cancer felt they had experienced the worst with a cancer diagnosis and altruistically tested for the sake of their children but a positive test result temporarily shifted their focus to decision-making around their personal health needs.

CONCLUSION

This study adds to clinical practice through raising awareness and adding insights into how women cope with living with inherited cancer risk and the personal and familial ramifications that ensue from it. A clear multi-professional structured care pathway for women from genetic testing result disclosure to undergoing risk-reducing surgery and/or surveillance should be developed.

Cancer risk assessment using genetic panel testing: considerations for clinical application

With the completion of the Human Genome Project and the development of high throughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, the use of multiplex genetic testing, in which multiple genes are sequenced simultaneously to test for one or more conditions, is growing rapidly. Reflecting underlying heterogeneity where a broad range of genes confer risks for one or more cancers, the development of genetic cancer panels to assess these risks represents just one example of how multiplex testing is being applied clinically. There are a number of issues and challenges to consider when conducting genetic testing for cancer risk assessment, and these issues become exceedingly more complex when moving from the traditional single-gene approach to panel testing. Here, we address the practical considerations for clinical use of panel testing for breast, ovarian, and colon cancers, including the benefits, limitations and challenges, genetic counseling issues, and management guidelines.

The efficacy of a standardized questionnaire in facilitating personalized communication about problems encountered in cancer genetic counseling: design of a randomized controlled trial

Background

Individuals with a personal or family history of cancer, can opt for genetic counseling and DNA-testing. Approximately 25% of these individuals experience clinically relevant levels of psychosocial distress, depression and/or anxiety after counseling. These problems are frequently left undetected by genetic counselors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a cancer genetics-specific screening questionnaire for psychosocial problems, the ‘Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer (PAHC) questionnaire’ together with the Distress Thermometer, in: (1) facilitating personalized counselor-counselee communication; (2) increasing counselors’ awareness of their counselees’ psychosocial problems; and (3) facilitating the management of psychosocial problems during and after genetic counseling.

Methods

This multicenter, randomized controlled trial will include 264 individuals undergoing cancer genetic counseling in two family cancer clinics in the Netherlands. Participants will be randomized to either: (1) an intervention group that completes the PAHC questionnaire, the results of which are made available to the genetic counselor prior to the counseling session; or (2) a control group that completes the PAHC questionnaire, but without feedback being given to the genetic counselor. The genetic counseling sessions will be audiotaped for content analysis. Additionally, study participants will be asked to complete questionnaires at baseline, three weeks after the initial counseling session, and four months after a telephone follow-up counseling session. The genetic counselors will be asked to complete questionnaires at the start of and at completion of the study, as well as a checklist directly after each counseling session. The questionnaires/checklists of the study include items on communication during genetic counseling, counselor awareness of their clients’ psychosocial problems, the (perceived) need for professional psychosocial support, cancer worries, general distress, specific psychosocial problems, satisfaction with care received, and experience using the PAHC questionnaire.

Discussion

This study will provide empirical evidence regarding the efficacy of a relatively brief psychosocial screening questionnaire in terms of facilitating personalized communication, increasing counselors’ awareness, and optimizing management of psychosocial problems in the cancer genetic counseling setting.

Trial registration

This study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR3205) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01562431).

Implementation and outcomes of telephone disclosure of clinical BRCA1/2 test results

OBJECTIVES

With an increasing demand for genetic services, effective and efficient delivery models for genetic testing are needed.

METHODS

In this prospective single-arm communication study, participants received clinical BRCA1/2 results by telephone with a genetic counselor and completed surveys at baseline, after telephone disclosure (TD) and after in-person clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

Sixty percent of women agreed to participate; 73% of decliners preferred in-person communication. Anxiety decreased from baseline to post-TD (p=0.03) and satisfaction increased (p<0.01). Knowledge did not change significantly from baseline to post-TD, but was higher post-clinical follow-up (p=0.04). Cancer patients had greater declines in state anxiety and African-American participants reported less increase in satisfaction. 28% of participants did not return for in-person clinical follow-up, particularly those with less formal education, and higher post-disclosure anxiety and depression (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Telephone disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results may not be associated with negative cognitive and affective responses among willing patients, although some subgroups may experience less favorable responses. Some patients do not return for in-person clinical follow-up and longitudinal outcomes are unknown.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further evaluation of longitudinal outcomes of telephone disclosure and differences among subgroups can inform how to best incorporate telephone communication into delivery of genetic services.

A rapid genetic counselling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer is associated with high rate of risk-reducing mastectomy in BRCA1/2-positive Italian women

BACKGROUND

Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) decreases breast cancer (BC) risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers by up to 95%, but the Italian attitude towards this procedure is reluctant.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is an observational study with retrospective design, using quantitative and qualitative research methods, aimed at evaluating the attitude towards RRM by rapid genetic counselling and testing (RGCT), at the time of BC diagnosis, compared with traditional genetic counselling and testing (TGCT), after previous BC surgery. Secondary aims were to investigate patient satisfaction after RRM and the rate of occult tumour in healthy breasts. A total of 1168 patients were evaluated: 1058 received TGCT, whereas 110 underwent RGCT.

RESULTS

In TGCT, among 1058 patients, 209 (19.7%) mutation carriers were identified, with the rate of RRM being 4.7% (10 of 209). Conversely in RGCT, among 110 patients, 36 resulted positive, of which, 15 (41.7%) underwent bilateral mastectomy at the BC surgery time, showing an overall good satisfaction, measured by interpretative phenomenological analysis 12 months after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that RGCT in patients with a hereditary profile is associated with a high rate of RRM at the BC surgery time, this being the pathway offered within a multidisciplinary organization.

The future in clinical genetics: affective forecasting biases in patient and clinician decision making

When clinicians facilitate and patients make decisions about predictive genetic testing, they often base their choices on the predicted emotional consequences of positive and negative test results. Research from psychology and decision making suggests that such predictions may often be biased. Work on affective forecasting-predicting one's future emotional states-shows that people tend to overestimate the impact of (especially negative) emotional events on their well-being; a phenomenon termed the impact bias. In this article, we review the causes and consequences of the impact bias in medical decision making, with a focus on applying such findings to predictive testing in clinical genetics. We also recommend strategies for reducing the impact bias and consider the ethical and practical implications of doing so.

Specific psychosocial issues of individuals undergoing genetic counseling for cancer - a literature review

Approximately 25% of individuals undergoing genetic counseling for cancer experiences clinically relevant levels of distress, anxiety and/or depression. However, these general psychological outcomes that are used in many studies do not provide detailed information on the specific psychosocial problems experienced by counselees. The aim of this review was to investigate the specific psychosocial issues encountered by individuals undergoing genetic counseling for cancer, and to identify overarching themes across these issues. A literature search was performed, using four electronic databases (PubMed, PsychInfo, CINAHL and Embase). Papers published between January 2000 and January 2013 were selected using combinations, and related indexing terms of the keywords: 'genetic counseling', 'psychology' and 'cancer'. In total, 25 articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified the specific issues addressed by these papers, and used meta-ethnography to identify the following six overarching themes: coping with cancer risk, practical issues, family issues, children-related issues, living with cancer, and emotions. A large overlap in the specific issues and themes was found between these studies, suggesting that research on specific psychosocial problems within genetic counseling has reached a point of saturation. As a next step, efforts should be made to detect and monitor these problems of counselees at an early stage within the genetic counseling process.

Issues of concern in risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing of younger breast cancer patients in Japan

About 5-10 % of breast cancer cases are considered to be hereditary, and germ line mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have been proven to contribute to the development of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC). Breast cancer diagnosed at a young age is an indication of a higher likelihood of HBOC. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing, especially for younger women with breast cancer, have started to be an integral element of practice due to advances in gene sequencing technologies and accumulating evidence for the clinical implications of BRCA mutation status for not only early breast cancer management, but also for the patient's own and their family's next cancer risk, and proactive steps toward a risk-reducing approach. As yet, the cancer genetic service system is immature in Japan. There are several problems to be solved to improve cancer genetic services in clinical practice for breast cancer.

The counselees' self-reported request for psychological help in genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer: not only psychopathology matters

BACKGROUND

Several studies have shown that counselees do not experience psychopathological levels of distress after DNA test result disclosure. However, it has not systematically been studied whether the absence of psychopathology also means that counselees do not want to receive help. Their self-reported request for help may be related not only with psychopathology/distress but also with other psychological needs (e.g., surgery decisions), genetics-specific needs (e.g., feeling vulnerable/stigmatized), and existential concerns (e.g., meaning in life).

METHODS

Questionnaires were filled in by Dutch cancer patients, before and after disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer: pathogenic mutation results (n = 30), uninformative results (n = 202), or unclassified variants (n = 16). Newly developed questions measured request for help, psychopathology was estimated with factor analyses on distress/psychopathology instruments, and several validated questionnaires measured other needs/concerns.

RESULTS

One-third of all counselees who reported a request for psychological help had actually received help. The level of psychopathology correlated between 0.34 and 0.44 with this self-reported need-for-help. Other needs, genetics-specific distress, and existential concerns correlated strongly/moderately with the counselees' self-reported need-for-help. Examples of other needs were intention to undergo surgery, inaccuracy of their interpretation, the impact of cancer, and family communication difficulties. Genetics-specific distress was for instance feeling vulnerable to develop cancer, stigma, and lack of mastery. Existential concerns were, among others, lack of purpose in life, low self-acceptance, and an unfulfilled wish for certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

The request for help is related to multiple factors. Referral to psychosocial professionals may be improved by not only discussing psychopathology during genetic-counseling sessions but also by other needs and existential concerns. Questions about other needs and existential issues may be added to psychological screening instruments.

DNA-testing for BRCA1/2 prior to genetic counselling in patients with breast cancer: design of an intervention study, DNA-direct

Background

Current practice for patients with breast cancer referred for genetic counseling, includes face-to-face consultations with a genetic counselor prior to and following DNA-testing. This is based on guidelines regarding Huntington’s disease in anticipation of high psychosocial impact of DNA-testing for mutations in BRCA1/2 genes. The initial consultation covers generic information regarding hereditary breast cancer and the (im)possibilities of DNA-testing, prior to such testing. Patients with breast cancer may see this information as irrelevant or unnecessary because individual genetic advice depends on DNA-test results. Also, verbal information is not always remembered well by patients. A different format for this information prior to DNA-testing is possible: replacing initial face-to-face genetic counseling (DNA-intake procedure) by telephone, written and digital information sent to patients’ homes (DNA-direct procedure).

Methods/design

In this intervention study, 150 patients with breast cancer referred to the department of Clinical Genetics of the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre are given the choice between two procedures, DNA-direct (intervention group) or DNA-intake (usual care, control group). During a triage telephone call, patients are excluded if they have problems with Dutch text, family communication, or of psychological or psychiatric nature. Primary outcome measures are satisfaction and psychological distress. Secondary outcome measures are determinants for the participant’s choice of procedure, waiting and processing times, and family characteristics. Data are collected by self-report questionnaires at baseline and following completion of genetic counseling. A minority of participants will receive an invitation for a 30 min semi-structured telephone interview, e.g. confirmed carriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation, and those who report problems with the procedure.

Discussion

This study compares current practice of an intake consultation (DNA-intake) to a home informational package of telephone, written and digital information (DNA-direct) prior to DNA-testing in patients with breast cancer. The aim is to determine whether DNA-direct is an acceptable procedure for BRCA1/2 testing, in order to provide customized care to patients with breast cancer, cutting down on the period of uncertainty during this diagnostic process.

Trial registration

The study is registered at the Dutch Trial Registry http://www.trialregister.nl (NTR3018).

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.

A pre-visit website with question prompt sheet for counselees facilitates communication in the first consultation for breast cancer genetic counseling: findings from a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The initial breast cancer genetic counseling visit is mainly educational, with large amounts of relatively standard information and little counselee participation. Counselors might provide more counselee-specific information if counselees would participate more. A pre-visit website providing computer-tailored information and a question prompt sheet (QPS) might help counselees to pursue a more active role.

METHODS

Counselees were randomized to receive usual care (UC) or UC plus the pre-visit website. The QPS questions were sent to the counselor before the visit. All counselees completed a baseline questionnaire, and visits were videotaped.

RESULTS

Intervention-group counselees (n = 102) did not ask more questions than UC-group counselees (n = 90). However, counselees in the intervention group more often shared their agenda (B = 10.37; confidence interval (CI) 2.68-18.06; P = 0.01), directed the communication (B = 0.41; CI 0.28-0.53; P = 0.01), and paraphrased the counselors' words (B = 5.18; CI 0.43-9.92; P = 0.03). Counselors introduced and answered the QPS questions. As a result, they provided more information about the topics of these questions, and the information provided was more specific to whether there was an indication for DNA testing.

CONCLUSION

A pre-visit website with QPS helped counselees to communicate more assertively. As a result, the information provided was more counselee specific, without affecting the visit duration.

You never call, you never write: why return of 'omic' results to research participants is both a good idea and a moral imperative

The rapid emergence of whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing of research participants has helped to revive the debate about whether genetic and other 'omic' data should be returned to research participants, and if so, which data, under what circumstances and by whom. While partial disclosure of such data has been justified in cases where participants' lives and health are threatened, full disclosure appears to remain beyond the pale for most researchers and bioethicists. I argue that it should not be and that the objections to full disclosure short-sightedly favor near-term considerations over long-term benefits. Return of genomic data to those who want it, even if a difficult undertaking and even if the meaning of the data is unclear, engages participants in science and the research enterprise, and positions them to be better stewards of their own health and wellbeing.

Is genetic counseling a stressful event?

Purpose. The aim of this paper was to investigate whether cancer genetic counseling could be considered as a stressful event and associated with more anxiety and/or depression compared to other cancer-related events for instance attending mammography screening or receiving a cancer diagnosis. Methods. A total of 4911 individuals from three Scandinavian countries were included in the study. Data was collected from individuals who had attended either cancer genetic counseling (self-referred and physician-referred) or routine mammography screening, were recalled for a second mammograpy due to a suspicious mammogram, had received a cancer diagnosis or had received medical follow-up after a breast cancer-surgery. Data from the genetic counseling group was also compared to normative data. Participants filled in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale twice: prior to a potentially stressful event and 14 days after the event. Results. Pre-counseling cancer genetic counselees reported significant lower level of anxiety compared to the cancer-related group, but higher levels of anxiety compared to the general population. Furthermore, the level of depression observed within the genetic counseling group was lower compared to other participants. Post-event there was no significant difference in anxiety levels between the cancer genetic counselees and all other groups; however, the level of depression reported in the self-referred group was significantly lower than observed in all other groups. Notably, the level of anxiety and depression had decreased significantly from pre-to post-events within the genetic counseling group. In the cancer-related group only the level of anxiety had decreased significantly post-event. Conclusion. Individuals who attend cancer genetic counseling do not suffer more anxiety or depression compared to all other cancer-related groups. However, some counselees might need additional sessions and extended support. Thus, identifying extremely worried individuals who need more support, and allocating further resources to their care, seems to be more sufficient.

BRCA1/2 genetic testing uptake and psychosocial outcomes in men

Few studies have quantitatively evaluated the uptake and outcomes of BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing in men. We conducted a prospective longitudinal study to describe and compare uptake of and psychosocial outcomes following BRCA1/2 testing in a sample of men and women at high-risk for carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. Men (n = 98) and women (n = 243) unaffected with cancer completed baseline assessments prior to genetic counseling and testing and then 6- and 12-months post-testing. Most men (n = 94; 95.9%) opted to have genetic testing, of whom 44 received positive BRCA1/2 genetic test results and 50 received true negative results. Among women, 93.4% had genetic testing, of whom 79 received positive results and 148 received negative results. In multivariate models, male BRCA1/2 carriers reported significantly higher genetic testing distress (6-months: Z = 4.48, P < 0.0001; 12-months: Z = 2.78, P < 0.01) than male non-carriers. After controlling for baseline levels of distress, no statistically significant differences emerged between male and female BRCA1/2 carriers in psychological distress at 12-months post-testing, although absolute differences were evident over time. Predictors of distress related to genetic testing among male carriers at 12-months included higher baseline cancer-specific distress (Z = 4.73, P < 0.0001) and being unmarried (Z = 2.18, P < 0.05). Similarly, baseline cancer-specific distress was independently associated with cancer-specific distress at 6- (Z = 3.66, P < 0.001) and 12-months (Z = 4.44, P < 0.0001) post-testing among male carriers. Clinically, our results suggest that pre-test assessment of distress and creation of educational materials specifically tailored to the needs and concerns of male carriers may be appropriate in this important but understudied high-risk group.

[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.

Distress and psychosocial needs of a heterogeneous high risk familial cancer population

In order to assess the levels of distress and psychosocial support needs of a high risk population, we undertook a study to look at both the objective and subjective levels of distress and the wants and needs of individuals from a high familial cancer risk population. Three hundred and eighteen individuals (160 affected, 158 unaffected) completed several distress and psychosocial needs questionnaires (including the Brief Symptom Inventory-18). Sixty key informants were also surveyed about their perspective on the support needs of this population. In the largely female (90%), largely HBOC syndrome group (approximately 90%), 20% had significant levels of generalized distress, with no significant differences between affected and unaffected individuals. Generalized distress was also not significantly different as a function of mutation status. Individuals who received inconclusive test results, however, were more likely to indicate somatic symptoms of distress. Those individuals who did not have social support were more likely to be those who had never had cancer and who either had a mutation, received inconclusive test results, or were not tested. Key informants were most likely to indicate that patients need more support. These results provide evidence for the importance of establishing regular psychosocial distress screening, including a focus on somatic symptoms, in such high risk populations.

Behavioral and psychosocial effects of rapid genetic counseling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial

Background

It has been estimated that between 5% and 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have a hereditary form of the disease, primarily caused by a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation. Such women have an increased risk of developing a new primary breast and/or ovarian tumor, and may therefore opt for preventive surgery (e.g., bilateral mastectomy, oophorectomy). It is common practice to offer high-risk patients genetic counseling and DNA testing after their primary treatment, with genetic test results being available within 4-6 months. However, some non-commercial laboratories can currently generate test results within 3 to 6 weeks, and thus make it possible to provide rapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) prior to primary treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of RGCT on treatment decisions and on psychosocial health.

Methods/Design

In this randomized controlled trial, 255 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with at least a 10% risk of carrying a BRCA gene mutation are being recruited from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either a RGCT intervention group (the offer of RGCT directly following diagnosis with tests results available before surgical treatment) or to a usual care control group. The primary behavioral outcome is the uptake of direct bilateral mastectomy or delayed prophylactic contralateral mastectomy. Psychosocial outcomes include cancer risk perception, cancer-related worry and distress, health-related quality of life, decisional satisfaction and the perceived need for and use of additional decisional counseling and psychosocial support. Data are collected via medical chart audits and self-report questionnaires administered prior to randomization, and at 6 month and at 12 month follow-up.

Discussion

This trial will provide essential information on the impact of RGCT on the choice of primary surgical treatment among women with breast cancer with an increased risk of hereditary cancer. This study will also provide data on the psychosocial consequences of RGCT and of risk-reducing behavior.

Trial registration

The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1493) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00783822).

Family matters: examining a multi-family group intervention for women with BRCA mutations in the scope of genetic counselling

The availability of family-centred services for women genetically at-risk for breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA) due to deleterious genetic mutations is still scarce, despite the distress that these women and their families may experience. This study describes a multi-family group intervention for women who tested positive for BRCA mutations and their families. Methods include a time-limited psycho-educational programme involving educational and support components and consisting of four semi-structured multi-family sessions. Three families (a total of nine people) attended the programme in genetic counselling for hereditary cancers at a Portuguese public hospital. A focus group interview was performed 1 month after the last session to assess both the practical and the psychosocial impacts and to collect suggestions from participants. The present paper focuses on the practical aspects of the intervention, its development and its evaluation. Participants reported that the programme is well-structured and that responds to the needs of patients and their families by improving coping skills and medical awareness in the adaptation to genetic illness. Results reinforce the need to integrate psychosocial and family-oriented interventions in genetic counselling, addressing the holistic experience of hereditary disease. Recommendations for enhancing the services available are provided. The multi-family discussion group, combining educative and supportive services with a family focus, can be successfully adapted in genetic counselling protocols.

Outcomes of interest in evidence-based evaluations of genetic tests

Genetic tests are increasingly available for use in traditional clinical practice settings and through direct-to-consumer marketing. The need for evidence-based information and guidance on their appropriate use has never been more apparent. The independent Working Group of the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Initiative commissions evidence-based reviews and develops recommendations to inform decision making surrounding the implementation of genetic tests and other applications of genomic technologies into clinical practice. A critical component of this analysis involves the identification and appropriate weighting of relevant health outcomes from genetic testing. Impacts of testing on morbidity and mortality are central considerations although research to document such outcomes can be challenging to conduct. In considering the broader impacts of genetic tests on the individual, familial and societal levels, psychosocial outcomes often take on increasing importance, and their systematic evaluation is a challenge for traditional methods of evidence-based review. Incorporating these types of outcomes in evidence-based processes is possible, however, and necessary to extract balanced and complete (or as complete as available data will allow) information on potential benefits and on potential harms. The framework used by the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Working Group in considering, categorizing, and weighting health-related outcomes as applied to genomic technologies is presented here.

Moving Toward Personalized Medicine: Treatment-Focused Genetic Testing of Women Newly Diagnosed With Ovarian Cancer

Objectives:

The presence of a germline BRCA mutation defines a genotype-specific group of women whose invasive ovarian cancer is associated with an increasingly well-defined prognostic and chemosensitivity biological profile. To determine the criteria that may be used to select patients for BRCA treatment-focused genetic testing, we performed a systemic literature search of studies that assessed BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequency in women with ovarian cancer unselected for family history. The results are discussed with regard to the added clinical value gained by identifying a germline BRCA mutation at the time of the ovarian cancer diagnosis.

Methods:

BRCA-related studies were identified in the CD-ROM databases PubMed (including MEDLINE), PsychINFO, and CINAHL and included in the review if they met the following criteria: they (a) assessed mutation frequency in women with ovarian cancer who were unselected for family history and ethnicity, (b) were published in a peer-review journal, (c) between January 1997 and October 2009, and (d) in the English language.

Results:

Studies investigating the prevalence of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations in ovarian cancer patients unselected for family history or ethnicity have found a pathological BRCA mutation rate of approximately 3% to 17%. Without a significant family history, specific features that may be used to target treatment-focused BRCA testing in the ovarian cancer setting include young age at onset (<50 years), high-grade serous tumor histology, and specific ethnicity associated with known BRCA founder mutations.

Conclusions:

We believe that given the growing appreciation of the prognostic significance of BRCA mutations and the differential chemosensitivity shown by these tumors, as well as the potential of novel agents such as poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, the identification of a germline BRCA mutation concurrent with a new diagnosis of ovarian cancer will significantly impact on tailoring personalized ovarian management in the future.

Evaluating the psychological effects of genetic testing in symptomatic patients: a systematic review

Most research on the effects of genetic testing is performed in individuals at increased risk for a specific disease (presymptomatic subjects) but not in patients already affected by disease. If results of these studies in presymptomatic subjects can be applied to patients is unclear. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the effects of genetic testing in patients and describe the methodological instruments used. About 2611 articles were retrieved and 16 studies included. Studies reported great variety in designs, methods, and patient outcomes. In total, 2868 participants enrolled of which 62% were patients. Patients appeared to have a lower perceived general health and higher levels of anxiety and depression than presymptomatic subjects before genetic testing. In the long term no psychological impairment was shown. We conclude that patients differ from presymptomatic subjects and may be more vulnerable to negative effects of genetic testing. Conclusions from earlier research on presymptomatic genetic testing cannot be generalized to patients, and more standardized research is needed.