Post-genetic Testing Research Articles

Risk-reducing surgeries for breast cancer in Brazilian patients undergoing multigene germline panel: impact of results on decision making.

To assess the behavior change of high-risk breast cancer patients regarding the intention to undergo risk-reducing mastectomies (RRM) before and after genetic testing results and to identify the main influencing factors in decision-making. Prospective cohort study conducted between November 2021 and October 2022 with women under follow-up at the high-risk outpatient clinic of the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP). Patients were referred for genetic testing, followed by counseling according to the test result. A total of 373 women were included. In the pre-genetic testing analysis, 54.1% of patients intended to undergo RRMs. After testing, 42.2% opted for the procedure. Behavior change occurred in 26.2%, mainly from "yes" to "no/don't know" (72,6%) (p < 0.001). The genetic test result was positive (LPV or PV) in 29.7% of patients. Among the 90 patients with positive results, 62 (68.9%) agreed to RRM, while 22 (24.4%) remained unwilling to accept RRM, regardless of the positive test. Significant influencing factors for behavior change pre- and post-genetic testing (in favor of surgery) in multivariate analysis were: positive genetic test result (OR 2.94, p < 0.001), personal cancer history (OR 2.7, p = 0.008), and ages between 40 and 49years (OR 2.07, p = 0.008) and ≥ 50years (OR 3.47, p < 0.001). In a Brazilian population at high-risk for breast cancer and users of the public health system, it was observed that most desired RRM, however, when genetic testing and counseling were performed, behavior change was observed, especially when the result was positive.

Identifying dysregulated regions in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis through chromatin accessibility outliers

The high heritability of ALS contrasts with its low molecular diagnosis rate post-genetic testing, pointing to potential undiscovered genetic factors. To aid the exploration of these factors, we introduced EpiOut, an algorithm to identify chromatin accessibility outliers that are regions exhibiting divergent accessibility from the population baseline in a single or few samples. Annotation of accessible regions with histone ChIP-seq and Hi-C indicates that outliers are concentrated in functional loci, especially among promoters interacting with active enhancers. Across different omics levels, outliers are robustly replicated, and chromatin accessibility outliers are reliable predictors of gene expression outliers and aberrant protein levels. When promoter accessibility does not align with gene expression, our results indicate that molecular aberrations are more likely to be linked to post-transcriptional regulation rather than transcriptional regulation. Our findings demonstrate that the outlier detection paradigm can uncover dysregulated regions in rare diseases. EpiOut is available at github.com/uci-cbcl/EpiOut.

Impact of multiple MEFV variants of unknown significance on the diagnosis and clinical presentation of familial Mediterranean fever

The detection of variants of unknown significance (VUS) in familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is common; however, their diagnostic value remains elusive, and the interpretation of multiple VUS remains difficult. Therefore, we examined FMF diagnosis-associated factors 1-year post-genetic testing in patients with only VUS and assessed the impact of multiple VUS on diagnosis and clinical features. A 1-year follow-up was conducted on patients clinically suspected of having FMF without confirmatory diagnosis owing to the presence of only VUS. Clinical features were compared between patients with a single VUS and those with multiple VUS among patients diagnosed with FMF. Among 261 patients followed up, 202 were diagnosed with FMF based on clinical judgment. No specific clinical symptoms or variant patterns at genetic testing were associated with diagnosis at 1 year. Multiple VUS was significantly and independently associated with a lower response to colchicine than single VUS among patients diagnosed with FMF. However, clinical symptoms showed no correlation with the number of VUS. In conclusion, predicting FMF diagnosis 1-year post-genetic testing in patients with only VUS remains challenging. Moreover, the impact of multiple VUS on FMF may be limited owing to the lack of correlation with clinical features, except colchicine response.

Abstract PO1-09-03: Clinical Impact of Multigene Panel Testing in Patients with a Personal or Family History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer Previously Negative for BRCA1/2 Genes

Abstract Rapid developments in cancer genetics and hereditary cancer risk assessments have enabled the identification of individuals at elevated risk for hereditary malignancies to guide enhanced cancer screening and prevention efforts. Multigene panel testing has emerged as the standard approach as emphasized in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency of other pathogenic mutations identified through multigene panel testing in individuals who previously tested negative for germline BRCA1/2 and assess the clinical impact of panel testing. Patients either previously diagnosed with breast cancer or with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer that had also been seen by Oncology Genetics at a single institution and tested negative for BRCA1/2 genes but had not undergone prior multigene panel testing were invited via a letter to return for an additional genetic counseling visit to discuss multigene panel testing. Patients were also able to opt-in to a survey component of the study and received an email to fill out the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) and Cancer Worry Scale (CWS). Surveys were completed prior to the initial genetic counseling appointment and repeated after discussion of the multigene panel test results. A total 24 women met with a genetic counselor of which 22 (92%) had a personal history of breast cancer, 1 (4%) had a family history of breast cancer, and 1 (4%) had a family history of ovarian cancer. The mean age was 52.6 years (range, 42-68) and 100% of women were Caucasian. Of the 24 women, 17 (71%) completed multigene panel testing. Of the women that underwent testing, 7 (41%) had negative results, 6 (35%) had variants of unknown significance (VUS), and 4 (24%) had a pathogenic mutation identified in another gene (CDKN2A, CHEK2, and CFTR). There was no significant change in MICRA or CWS scores after multigene panel results were reviewed in the 9 patients that completed both pre- and post-genetic testing surveys. The mean/median summary MICRA scores pre- and post-counselling were 30 (SD 12.4), median 26 (min 18, max 56), and 21.2 (SD 15.4), median 21 (min 3, max 43), respectively (p=0.19, Wilcoxon signed ranks test). The mean/median summary CWS scores pre- and post-counselling were 14.3 (SD 5), median 15 (min 7, max 24), and 13.6 (SD 2.59), median 14 (min 10, max 17), respectively (p=0.53, Wilcoxon signed ranks test). Of the 4 patients with newly identified pathogenic mutations, 2 started new screening protocols and 1 underwent a prophylactic mastectomy. In conclusion, multigene panel testing identified pathogenic mutations in a subset of individuals who previously tested negative for BRCA1/2 genes leading to changes in clinical management. The completion of multigene panel testing did not lead to a significant increase in MICRA or CWS scores. Key limitations of this study include a small sample size and an all Caucasian population. Citation Format: Devon Miller, Stephanie Pritzl, Angela Tess, Jessica Gooding, Lisa Barroilhet, Lori Dubenske, Kari Wisinski. Clinical Impact of Multigene Panel Testing in Patients with a Personal or Family History of Breast or Ovarian Cancer Previously Negative for BRCA1/2 Genes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-09-03.

Satisfaction With Clinician-Led Germline Genetic Counseling in Patients With Prostate Cancer.

Indications for germline testing in prostate cancer patients have expanded substantially over the past decade. With a near-universal shortage of genetic counselors and increasing demand, increased access to genetic counseling is crucial. We sought to prospectively implement and assess a clinician-led approach to genetic counseling and testing. Patients with metastatic or localized prostate cancer meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network® criteria for consideration of genetic testing were offered pre-test genetic counseling by their urologist or medical oncologist as part of their routine clinical care and concurrently approached for enrollment in the Germline Genetics in Prostate Cancer Study. Consented patients filled out a post-counseling survey using validated instruments to assess the quality of counseling. For patients who elected to undergo genetic testing, an additional validated questionnaire was completed following disclosure of results. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients undergoing testing, with a target >60% of patients. The secondary outcome was overall satisfaction with counseling, with a target >85% of patients. A total of 275 patients enrolled, and 203 patients elected to undergo genetic testing. Post-counseling surveys were obtained from 265 patients, and post-genetic testing surveys were obtained from 132 patients. Patient satisfaction was high, with 98% of patients reporting being satisfied with the overall quality of pre-test counseling, and 74% of patients elected to undergo genetic testing. These results support the effectiveness of clinician-led genetic counseling in prostate cancer. With clinician training, this approach can be utilized to expand access to appropriate germline genetic testing.

GENESIS: Gene-Specific Machine Learning Models for Variants of Uncertain Significance Found in Catecholaminergic Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia and Long QT Syndrome-Associated Genes.

Cardiac channelopathies such as catecholaminergic polymorphic tachycardia and long QT syndrome predispose patients to fatal arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. As genetic testing has become common in clinical practice, variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in genes associated with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia and long QT syndrome are frequently found. The objective of this study was to predict pathogenicity of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia-associated RYR2 VUS and long QT syndrome-associated VUS in KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A by developing gene-specific machine learning models and assessing them using cross-validation, cellular electrophysiological data, and clinical correlation. The GENe-specific EnSemble grId Search framework was developed to identify high-performing machine learning models for RYR2, KCNQ1, KCNH2, and SCN5A using variant- and protein-specific inputs. Final models were applied to datasets of VUS identified from ClinVar and exome sequencing. Whole cell patch clamp and clinical correlation of selected VUS was performed. The GENe-specific EnSemble grId Search models outperformed alternative methods, with area under the receiver operating characteristics up to 0.87, average precisions up to 0.83, and calibration slopes as close to 1.0 (perfect) as 1.04. Blinded voltage-clamp analysis of HEK293T cells expressing 2 predicted pathogenic variants in KCNQ1 each revealed an ≈80% reduction of peak Kv7.1 current compared with WT. Normal Kv7.1 function was observed in KCNQ1-V241I HEK cells as predicted. Though predicted benign, loss of Kv7.1 function was observed for KCNQ1-V106D HEK cells. Clinical correlation of 9/10 variants supported model predictions. Gene-specific machine learning models may have a role in post-genetic testing diagnostic analyses by providing high performance prediction of variant pathogenicity.

Physicians communicating with women at genetic risk of breast and ovarian cancer: Are we in the middle of the ford between contradictory messages and unshared decision making?

BRCA1/2 genetic testing offers tremendous opportunities for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of breast and ovarian cancer. Women acquire valuable information that can help them to make informed decisions about their health. However, knowing one’s susceptibility to developing cancer may be burdensome for several women, as this risk needs to be managed over time through a continuous dialogue with multiple healthcare professionals. We explored how communication between physicians and unaffected women carrying BRCA1/2 germline pathogenic variants was experienced by women in relation to their genetic risk. Data came from qualitative interviews conducted in Switzerland with 32 unaffected women carrying BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and aware of their genetic status for at least 3 years. We identified three different types of message as conveyed by physicians to women: (1) a normative message, (2) an over-empowering message, and (3) a minimizing message. On one hand, we found that women are exposed to contradictory messages, often simultaneously, in their interactions with healthcare professionals during their post-genetic testing journey. On the other hand, women’s reports highlighted the absence of shared decision-making in such interactions. The combination of these two findings resulted in a strong sense of disorientation, frustration, and powerlessness among participants. Healthcare professionals interacting with high cancer risk women are urged to align in favor of a both concerted and shared decision-making approach when discussing options for managing genetic risk.

Effect of genetic testing results on patient-reported quality of life among patients undergoing panel testing for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.

1584 Background: This study compared patient-reported stress, anxiety, and depression between newly diagnosed ovarian cancer patients with pathogenic genetic testing results versus patients with non-informative results (i.e., variants of uncertain significance (VUS) or negative). Methods: Patients underwent genetic testing (GT) via a facilitated referral pathway (Frey et al, Gynecol Oncol 2020) through which they were referred for genetic counseling and GT by their gynecologic oncologist within six weeks of diagnosis from 10/2015 to 5/2019. English-speaking patients completed three quality of life (QoL) instruments: Impact of Events Scale (IOES), State-Trait Anxiety Questionnaire (STAI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) immediately pre-and post-GT and 6 months post GT. Two-way mixed ANOVA was performed to analyze effect of GT results on QoL over time with significance p &lt; 0.05. Results: One hundred ten patients were enrolled in the pathway and 83 (76%) patients underwent GT. Among these, 15 (18%) had potentially actionable pathogenic mutations ( BRCA1-8, BRCA2-4, MSH2-2, MRE11A-1); 26 (31%) had VUS results; 3 (4%) had both a pathogenic mutation and a VUS result; and 42 (51%) had negative results. Sixty patients (72%) completed QoL assessments pre and post GT, and 37 (44%) patients at 6-9 months post GT. For all patients, GT results did not affect QoL scales across our time points. By mean scores across all-comers, patients demonstrated mild stress at each time point and clinically significant anxiety immediate post-GT. All patients had a statistically significance decrease in HADS depression scores over time from pre-GT to 6 months post-GT (mean score 4.98 vs 2.97, p = 0.020). Patients with VUS had lower HADS mean anxiety scores across time (3.62) compared to patients with pathogenic (7.44) or negative mutations (6.83, p = 0.029). For patients without mutations, there was a significant decrease in clinically significant anxiety by STAI-state score at 6 months (p = 0.002) and a decrease in borderline anxiety by HADS scores at 6 months (p = 0.005). This effect was not present for patients with pathogenic mutations or VUS. Conclusions: A pathogenic result does not impact QoL scales immediately pre or post GT or at 6 months post GT, though patients with negative mutations were more likely to show a decrease in anxiety over time. Patients should be recommended GT at time of diagnosis of ovarian cancer without concern of increased stress, anxiety, or depression based on GT results.

Abstract P2-08-13: Genetic testing for breast cancer and associated downstream utilization and costs

Abstract Background: Given the clinical utility for diagnosis and treatment of hereditary breast cancer, the use of genetic testing is growing. However, few data exist on the association between genetic testing and subsequent clinical outcomes, healthcare utilization, and cost. Objective: To examine medical utilization, cost, and survival in individuals with breast cancer who were tested for genes with high evidence for predicting breast cancer risk, as compared to those who were untested. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in commercial claims. Adult women with non-metastatic breast cancer during 2013-2017 were identified and divided into two groups: (1) a genetic testing group (GTG) that was tested during January 2014-June 2017 for high risk genes for hereditary breast cancer (BRCA, PTEN) and (2) a no genetic testing group (NGTG) that did not test for any genes or gene expression for hereditary breast cancer. Members in the NGTG were matched 1:1 to the GTG by propensity scores using age, region, baseline clinical variables (other cancer types, breast imaging, breast biopsy, Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index), and baseline all-cause and cancer-related costs. Utilization and cost outcomes were assessed during 1 year post-genetic testing. We also estimated survival and all-cause healthcare costs during full follow-up, in the main sample and in a “3-year” sample of women who took their first genetic test at least 3 years prior to study end. Variables remained unbalanced after matching were adjusted in regression modeling. Results: The study identified 12,236 patients in the GTG and 53,125 patients in the NGTG. All patient covariates, except baseline cancer-related costs, were balanced after 1:1 propensity score matching (n=10,887 matched patients in each group). In the GTG and NGTG, 18% and 1%, respectively, had follow-up genetic testing (p&amp;lt;.001). The GTG, compared to the matched NGTG, was more likely to have breast imaging (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.51), breast biopsy (aOR 2.24; 95% CI 2.02-2.49), breast surgery (aOR 2.76; 95% CI 2.62-2.91), and other cancer treatments during 1 year of follow-up (Table; all p&amp;lt;0.001, except mammogram p-value=0.002). All-cause healthcare cost was $27,131 higher among GTG compared to NGTG during 1 year of follow-up ($78,733 versus $51,602; p&amp;lt;0.001) and remained high at 3 years ($55,479 versus $38,037 per-member-per-year; p&amp;lt; 0.001). Genetic testing for breast cancer was not associated with difference in survival (overall adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.17, 95% CI 0.82-1.67; 3-year aHR 0.77, 95% CI 0.23-2.63). Conclusions: Increased treatment and healthcare costs are likely to follow genetic testing and should be discussed in the shared decision-making process. Survival analyses were inconclusive due to low rate of mortality. Citation Format: Shia T Kent, Xiaoxue Chen, David Debono, Karen Lewis, Abiy Agiro. Genetic testing for breast cancer and associated downstream utilization and costs [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-08-13.

The big reveal: Family disclosure patterns of BRCA genetic test results among young Black women with invasive breast cancer.

Despite higher incidence and mortality of breast cancer among younger Black women, genetic testing outcomes remain severely understudied among Blacks. Past research on disclosure of genetic testing results to family members has disproportionately focused on White, educated, high socioeconomic status women. This study addresses this gap in knowledge by assessing (a) to whom Black women disclose genetic test results and (b) if patterns of disclosure vary based on test result (e.g., BRCA1/2 positive, negative, variant of uncertain significance [VUS]). Black women (N=149) with invasive breast cancer diagnosed age ≤50years from 2009 to 2012 received free genetic testing through a prospective, population-based study. At 12months post-testing, women reported with whom they shared their genetic test results. The exact test by binomial distribution was used to examine whether disclosure to female relatives was significantly greater than disclosure to male relatives, and logistic regression analyses tested for differences in disclosure to any female relative, any male relative, parents, siblings, children, and spouses by genetic test result. Most (77%) women disclosed their results to at least one family member. Disclosure to female relatives was significantly greater than disclosure to males (p<.001). Compared to those who tested negative or had a VUS, BRCA1/2-positive women were significantly less likely to disclose results to their daughters (ORBRCApositive =0.25, 95% CI=0.07-0.94, p=.041) by 12months post-genetic testing. Genetic test result did not predict any other type of disclosure (all ps>0.12). Results suggest that in Black families, one benefit of genetic testing-to inform patients and their family about cancer risk information-is not being realized. To increase breast cancer preventive care among high-risk Black women, the oncology care team should prepare Black BRCA1/2-positive women to share genetic test results with family members and, in particular, their daughters.

Outcomes associated with rapid genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 at time of breast cancer diagnosis.

1577 Background: Bilateral mastectomy improves survival for women with BRCA-associated breast cancer. Most women do not know their BRCA status at the time of BC diagnosis when making surgical decisions. Rapid genetic testing (RGT) allows a woman to have genetic test results prior to treatment decision making, but it is unclear if RGT has an impact on treatment choices. It is also unclear if there are psychosocial implications associated with genetic testing at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. The objective of the current study was to assess the impact of RGT at the time of BC diagnosis on surgical decision-making and psychosocial functioning. Methods: Eligible women were referred from participating surgeons at BC diagnosis. Women completed baseline questionnaires assessing treatment preferences, cancer related distress, anxiety, and depression. All participants received in-person pre-test genetic counselling and genetic test results were given within 10 days. Participants completed surveys at 1 week and 1 year post-genetic testing to assess treatments and psychosocial functioning. Results: 1010 women consented to participate and 60 (5.9%) were identified with a BRCA mutation. 15% of those identified with a BRCA mutation did not meet provincial eligibility criteria for genetic testing, and 20% were eligible prior to a breast cancer diagnosis but had not received testing. Mean levels of cancer-related distress, anxiety and depression declined significantly from baseline to 1 year for all women (all p &lt; .05), and there were no differences at any time point between those with and without a BRCA mutation. Of those identified with a BRCA mutation, 67.3% reported that their surgery choice changed. 73.7% of BRCA carriers had a bilateral mastectomy, compared to 20.2% of BRCA negative (p &lt; 0.001). Most women used genetic testing results for surgical decision making (96.1% of BRCA positive and 86.4% for negative). Conclusions: Rapid genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 at the time of BC diagnosis does not have a negative impact on psychosocial functioning. There are no differences in cancer-related distress, anxiety or depression between women who receive a positive result compare to a negative genetic test result. Furthermore, surgical choice changed for many women identified with a BRCA mutation, with the majority electing for bilateral mastectomy.

Patient communication of cancer genetic test results in a diverse population.

Research on the communication of genetic test results has focused predominately on non-Hispanic White (NHW) mutation-positive families with high-risk hereditary cancer conditions. Little is known about this process for racially and ethnically diverse individuals or for those with mutations in moderate risk genes. The communication behaviors of study participants who carry a gene mutation were analyzed 3 months after disclosure of genetic test results. Participants were queried about communication of their results, as part of a prospective study of multi-gene panel genetic testing. The responses of particpants who tested positive were analyzed by race/ethnicity and by level of cancer risk (high vs. moderate). Of the 216 mutation-positive study participants, 136 (63%) responded. Self-reported race/ethnicity was 46% NHW, 41% Hispanic, 10% Asian, and 2% Black. The majority (99.0%, n = 135) had shared their results with someone and 96% had told a family member (n = 130). Hispanic respondents were less likely to have told a healthcare provider about their results than NHW (29% vs. 68%, p < .0001). Asian respondents were less likely than NHW to encourage family members to undergo testing (OR = 0.1, p = .03); but Asian family members were more likely to undergo testing (OR = 8.0, p = .03). There were no differences in communication between those with a mutation in a high- or moderate-risk gene. Three months post genetic testing, communication of results was very high; 30% reported a family member underwent genetic testing. Further studies are needed to better understand the communication process in individuals from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds.

Impact of Genetic Counseling and Testing on Altruistic Motivations to Test for BRCA1/2: a Longitudinal Study.

Despite the importance of altruism in an individual's participation in genetic counseling and testing, little research has explored the change in altruistic motivations to test over time. This study analyzed altruistic motivations to test and change in altruistic motivations after genetic counseling and testing among individuals (N=120) at elevated risk for BRCA1/2 mutations. The perceived benefits of genetic testing were assessed and utilized in a mixed-methods, repeated measures design at three time points: pre-counseling, counseling and post-genetic testing, along with transcripts of genetic counseling sessions. Qualitative analysis using an immersion/crystallization method resulted in six common perceived benefits of testing: cancer prevention, awareness, family's survival, relief from anxiety, for science, and future planning. Perceived benefits were then coded into three categories according to Hamilton's kin selection theory: altruistic motivation, personal motivation, and motivation for mutual benefit. At pre-counseling, those with a personal cancer history (p=0.003) and those with one or more children (p=0.013), were significantly more likely to cite altruistic motivations to test. Altruistic motivations significantly increased post-counseling (p=0.01) but declined post-testing (p<0.001). Labov's narrative analysis further elucidated the context of altruistic and personal motivations. The possibility of a positive test result might have led those with personal history of cancer to have altruistic motivations for testing. Genetic counseling may have increased altruistic motivations to help family and may be a prime opportunity to discuss other forms of altruism.

Psychiatric implications of cancer genetic testing.

As genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes has transitioned from research to clinical settings, research regarding its accompanying psychosocial effects has grown. Men and women being tested for hereditary cancer syndromes may experience some psychological distress while going through the process of testing or after carrier status is identified. Psychological distress appears to decrease over the course of the first year and it is typically not clinically significant. Longer term studies show mixed results with some mutation carriers continuing to experience elevated distress. Baseline distress is the greatest risk factor for both immediate (weeks-12 months) and long-term psychological distress (18 mo-8 years post genetic testing). In addition to baseline psychological distress, other risk factors can be identified to help identify individuals who may need psychosocial interventions during the genetic testing process. The challenges of providing clinical care to the growing population of individuals identified to be at increased risk for heritable cancers present opportunities for research and new models of care.

Patient with Major Depressive Disorder Responds to L-Methylfolate Post-Genetic Testing

The current case describes a 69 year old Caucasian male with a long history of untreated depressive symptoms. At age 68, the patient was started on a treatment regime for depression, but remission was not achieved. Genetic testing was performed to determine if this patient’s genetic background could help explain his resistance and suggest a more effective treatment strategy. The results of the genetic test showed variations in four pharmacodynamic-related genes, including MTHFR. These results supported the use of several medications in the current regime and indicated the addition of L-methylfolate which led to complete remission of depression symptoms.

Development and validation of a brief screening instrument for psychosocial risk associated with genetic testing: a pan-Canadian cohort study

ObjectivesTo develop a brief, reliable and valid instrument to screen psychosocial risk among those who are undergoing genetic testing for Adult-Onset Hereditary Disease (AOHD).DesignA prospective two-phase cohort study.Setting5 genetic testing...

A follow‐up study on men tested for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations: impacts and coping processes

The objective of this study was to examine cognitive, emotional, and behavioral impacts of testing for germline mutations in breast/ovarian cancer-associated genes (BRCA1/BRCA2) among men who undergo genetic testing. A cross-sectional study compared 51 mutation carriers with 30 men who tested negative for the mutations in both genes. Telephone interviews were conducted with all participants at a median of 4 years after disclosure of test results in a genetic counseling context. Testing-related distress, cancer risk perceptions, perceived behavioral changes following testing, and perceptions of breast cancer were measured using standard questionnaires. Up to 4 years postgenetic testing, 48% of those who tested positively report that the test increased their perceptions of risk, and 74% of them increased surveillance for cancer. Men who had been tested as non-carriers did not report increased perceived risk (0%) and relatively few increased surveillance (31%). Carriers were significantly more distressed from testing, perceived breast cancer as having less consequences and emotional effects on the patient, and as being more treatable than non-carriers. These results have implications with regard to the Self Regulatory Theory. They show that (i) illness representations are affected by fear-arousing health information; (ii) risk perceptions elicit health behaviors; and (iii) men tested for BRCA mutations have specific concerns that should be attended to.

Lynch syndrome: barriers to and facilitators of screening and disease management

BackgroundLynch syndrome is a hereditary cancer with confirmed carriers at high risk for colorectal (CRC) and extracolonic cancers. The purpose of the current study was to develop a greater understanding of the factors influencing decisions about disease management post-genetic testing.MethodsThe study used a grounded theory approach to data collection and analysis as part of a multiphase project examining the psychosocial and behavioral impact of predictive DNA testing for Lynch syndrome. Individual and small group interviews were conducted with individuals from 10 families with the MSH2 intron 5 splice site mutation or exon 8 deletion. The data from confirmed carriers (n = 23) were subjected to re-analysis to identify key barriers to and/or facilitators of screening and disease management.ResultsThematic analysis identified personal, health care provider and health care system factors as dominant barriers to and/or facilitators of managing Lynch syndrome. Person-centered factors reflect risk perceptions and decision-making, and enduring screening/disease management. The perceived knowledge and clinical management skills of health care providers also influenced participation in recommended protocols. The health care system barriers/facilitators are defined in terms of continuity of care and coordination of services among providers.ConclusionsIndividuals with Lynch syndrome often encounter multiple barriers to and facilitators of disease management that go beyond the individual to the provider and health care system levels. The current organization and implementation of health care services are inadequate. A coordinated system of local services capable of providing integrated, efficient health care and follow-up, populated by providers with knowledge of hereditary cancer, is necessary to maintain optimal health.

Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: barriers to and facilitators of screening and disease management

Background Hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is a hereditary cancer syndrome in which confirmed carriers of a gene mutation are at high risk for colorectal (CRC) and extracolonic cancers. The purpose of the current study was to develop a greater understanding of the factors influencing the decision-making of confirmed HNPCC carriers post-genetic testing about screening and disease management. Methods The study used a grounded theory approach to data collection and analysis as part of a multiphase project examining the psychosocial and behavioral impact of genetic counselling and DNA testing for HNPCC on individuals in high risk families with the MSH2 intron 5 splice site mutation or exon 8 deletion. The data from confirmed carriers (n=23) were subjected to re-analysis for the purpose of identifying key barriers to and/or facilitators of effective screening and disease management. Results Thematic analysis identified personal, health care provider and health care system as the dominant barriers to and facilitators of screening and disease management. Person-centered barriers/facilitators included (1) risk perceptions and decision-making and, (2) enduring screening/disease management. Provider barriers/facilitators were defined in terms of participant perceptions of physician awareness of the family history of HNPCC, knowledge of the disease and recommended screening/ treatment protocols, and clinical management skills. The health care system barriers/facilitators were defined in terms of continuity of care and coordination of services among different providers. Conclusions Individuals at high risk for HPNCC-related cancers often encounter multiple barriers to and facilitators of screening and disease management that go beyond the individual and family to the provider and health care system levels. The current organization and implementation of health care services for clients who are at high genetic risk of developing cancer is inadequate. A coordinated system of local services capable of providing integrated, efficient health care and follow-up, populated by health care providers with knowledge of inherited cancer, is necessary to maintain optimal health in these families.

Identification of Patients at High Risk of Psychological Distress After BRCA1 Genetic Testing

To predict which women might suffer from abnormally high levels of anxiety and depression after receiving a positive genetic BRCA1 test result, series of pregenetic testing and postgenetic testing psychological measurements were performed. Of 3524 women who returned the psychological test sheets before receiving their genetic test result, 111 women were found to carry a BRCA1 mutation. We found that overall, anxiety does not increase in women who receive a positive BRCA1 genetic test result; however, women who experience high levels of anxiety before genetic testing continue to experience high levels of anxiety up to 1 year posttesting. There were differences in cancer-related distress in affected and unaffected women. BRCA1 carriers with a previous diagnosis of cancer had significantly higher levels of cancer-related distress at 1 month posttest than those without cancer. Our findings suggest that healthcare providers should consider including a brief pretest psychological assessment before initiating genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2.