Abstract

Simple SummaryRisk stratification using genetic testing to identify women at increased risk of ovarian cancer may increase the number of patients to whom risk-reducing surgery (e.g., salpingo-oophorectomy) may be offered. However, little is known about public acceptability of such approaches. Our online experimental survey aimed to explore whether women aged 45–75 in the general population are willing to undergo ovarian cancer risk assessment, including genetic testing, and whether women’s potential acceptance of risk-reducing surgery differs depending on their estimated risk. We looked at whether psychological and cognitive factors mediated women’s decision-making. The majority of participants would be interested in having genetic testing. In response to our hypothetical scenarios, a substantial proportion of participants were open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased from 2% to 5 or 10%.Risk stratification using genetic and/or other types of information could identify women at increased ovarian cancer risk. The aim of this study was to examine women’s potential reactions to ovarian cancer risk stratification. A total of 1017 women aged 45–75 years took part in an online experimental survey. Women were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions describing hypothetical personal results from ovarian cancer risk stratification, and asked to imagine they had received one of three results: (a) 5% lifetime risk due to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and lifestyle factors; (b) 10% lifetime risk due to SNPs and lifestyle factors; (c) 10% lifetime risk due to a single rare mutation in a gene. Results: 83% of women indicated interest in having ovarian cancer risk assessment. After receiving their hypothetical risk estimates, 29% of women stated they would have risk-reducing surgery. Choosing risk-reducing surgery over other behavioural responses was associated with having higher surgery self-efficacy and perceived response-efficacy, but not with perceptions of disease threat, i.e., perceived risk or severity, or with experimental condition. A substantial proportion of women age 45–75 years may be open to the idea of surgery to reduce risk of ovarian cancer, even if their absolute lifetime risk is only increased to as little as 5 or 10%.

Highlights

  • Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer among women in the UK

  • This is consistent with previous research by Meisel et al (2016), who found that 88% of a general population sample of women in the UK would be interested in genetic testing for ovarian cancer risk if it were offered by the National Health Service (NHS), and included information about breast cancer risk, echoing previous support from qualitative research for the availability of genetic testing and risk-stratified screening [43]

  • We found that a substantial proportion of British women over the age of 45 years might be open to the idea of having RRSO, even if their absolute lifetime risk were increased from a general population risk of 2% to as little as 5% or 10%

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer among women in the UK. The general population lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer is approximately 2%, and incidence is predicted to rise by26% in the UK, 14% in Europe, and by 55% worldwide over the two decades [1]. The general population lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer is approximately 2%, and incidence is predicted to rise by. The risk of ovarian cancer rises with age, increasing significantly in women over 45 years [2]. DNA variants in a number of cancer susceptibility genes are known to be associated with ovarian cancer: women with a high penetrance genetic variant, such as a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, are considered to be at high risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer [3,4,5]. Genetic testing for ovarian cancer risk has been clinically indicated only for women with a strong family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. Using a family history based approach misses over half the cancer susceptibility gene (CSG)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.