Factors associated with adherence to BRCA1/2 mutation testing after oncogenetic counseling in long-surviving patients with a previous diagnosis of breast or ovarian cancer.
BRCA1/2
Carrier testing
Decision making
Oncogenetic counseling
Journal
Journal of community genetics
ISSN: 1868-310X
Titre abrégé: J Community Genet
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101551501
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Sep 2023
19 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
29
04
2023
accepted:
12
09
2023
pubmed:
19
9
2023
medline:
19
9
2023
entrez:
18
9
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
BRCA1/2 mutations account for 5 to 10% of breast and 15% of ovarian cancers. Various guidelines on BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing have been issued, and the criteria have evolved over the years. Oncogenetic counseling aims to inform patients about the possibility and implications of undergoing predictive testing and risk management programs. We analyzed a cohort of 50 subjects with a previous personal history of breast or ovarian cancer who had not been tested for BRCA1/2 mutations at the time of diagnosis but were found eligible according to the most recent guidelines. All patients were offered pre-test oncogenetic counseling and BRCA1/2 genetic testing. The mean time from cancer diagnosis to genetic counseling was over 10 years. We analyzed socio-demographic and psychological parameters associated with the decision to undergo BRCA1/2 genetic testing or the reasons behind the withdrawal. Thirty-nine patients underwent BRCA1/2 genetic testing. Patients who accept the genetic test communicate more easily with family members than those who refuse. Factors associated with test refusal are having a long-term partner and having a negative perception of life. There is a trend, although not statistically significant, toward younger age at cancer diagnosis, more likely to participate in cancer screening programs (71.8% vs. 45.5%), and more likely to have daughters (63.3% vs. 37.5%) in the group that accepted the test. The offer of BRCA testing was well accepted by our study population, despite the many years since the cancer diagnosis. With the perspective of further broadening the access criteria to genetic testing, it is important to understand how to best approach pre-test counseling in long-surviving patients with a previous diagnosis of cancer.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37723374
doi: 10.1007/s12687-023-00671-x
pii: 10.1007/s12687-023-00671-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Andrews L, Meiser B, Apicella C, Tucker K (2004) Psychological impact of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in women of Ashkenazi Jewish background: a prospective study. Genet Test Fall 8(3):240–7. https://doi.org/10.1089/gte.2004.8.240 . (PMID: 15727246)
doi: 10.1089/gte.2004.8.240
Ardern-Jones A, Kenen R, Eeles R (2005) Too much, too soon? Patients and health professionals’ views concerning the impact of genetic testing at the time of breast cancer diagnosis in women under the age of 40. Eur J Cancer Care (engl) 14(3):272–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00574.x . (PMID: 15952973)
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00574.x
pubmed: 15952973
Collins Francis S, McKusick Victor A (2001) implications of the Human Genome Project for Medical Science. JAMA 285(5):540–544
doi: 10.1001/jama.285.5.540
pubmed: 11176855
Guttmacher AE, McGuire AL, Ponder B, Steffanson K (2010) Personalized genomic information: preparing for the future of genetic medicine. Nat Rev Gen (perspectives) 11:161–165
doi: 10.1038/nrg2735
He W, Eriksson L, Törnberg S et al (2019) Discontinuation of adjuvant hormone therapy among breast cancer patients not previously attending mammography screening. BMC Med 17:24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1252-6
doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1252-6
pubmed: 30700300
pmcid: 6354407
Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alvarez W (1979) Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med 41(3):209–218. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-197905000-00004 . (PMID: 472086)
doi: 10.1097/00006842-197905000-00004
pubmed: 472086
Laberge, AM, Burke, W (2008) Personalized medicine and genomics, in From Birth to Death and Bench to Clinic: The Hastings Center Bioethics Briefing Book for Journalists, Policymakers, and Campaigns, ed. Mary Crowley (Garrison, NY: The Hastings Center), 133–136
Lehmann LS, Weeks JC, Klar N, Biener L, Garber JE (2000) Disclosure of familial genetic information: perceptions of the duty to inform. Am J Med 109:705–711
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9343(00)00594-5
pubmed: 11137485
Lerman C, Lustbader E, Rimer B, Daly M, Miller S, Sands C et al (1995) Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:286–292
doi: 10.1093/jnci/87.4.286
pubmed: 7707420
Lerman C, Narod S, Schulman K, Hughes C, Gomez-Caminero A, Bonney G, Gold K, Trock B, Main D, Lynch J, Fulmore C, Snyder C, Lemon SJ, Conway T, Tonin P, Lenoir G, Lynch H (1996) BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes. JAMA. 275(24):1885–92 (PMID: 8648868)
doi: 10.1001/jama.1996.03530480027036
pubmed: 8648868
Lerman C, Biesecker B, Benkenford JL, Kerner J, Gomez-Caminero A, Hughes C, Reed MM (1997) Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA 1 gene testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 89(2):148–157
doi: 10.1093/jnci/89.2.148
pubmed: 8998184
Lerman C, Peshkin B, Hughes C, Isaacs C (1998) Family disclosure in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: determinants and consequences. J Health Care Law Policy 1(353):372
Lombardi L, Bramanti SM, Babore A, Stuppia L, Trumello C, Antonucci I, Cavallo A (2019) Psychological aspects, risk and protective factors related to BRCA genetic testing: a review of the literature. Support Care Cancer 27(10):3647–3656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04918-7 . (Epub 2019 Jun 15 PMID: 31203511)
doi: 10.1007/s00520-019-04918-7
pubmed: 31203511
Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Verhoog LC, Brekelmans CT et al (2000) Presymptomatic DNA testing and prophylacticsurgery in families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2mutation. Lancet 335:2015–2020
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02347-3
Meijers-Heijboer H, Brekelmans CT, Menke-Plymers M, Seynaeve C, Baalbergen A, Burger C, Crepin E, van den Quweland AW, van Geel B, Klijn JG (2003) Use of genetic testing and prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy in women with breast or ovarian cancer from families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Clin Oncol 21:1675–1681
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.09.052
pubmed: 12721241
Meiser B (2005) Psychological impact of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: an update of the literature. Psychooncology 14:1060–1074
doi: 10.1002/pon.933
pubmed: 15937976
Melchor L, Benítez J (2013) The complex genetic landscape of familial breast cancer. Hum Genet 132(8):845–863
doi: 10.1007/s00439-013-1299-y
pubmed: 23552954
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast, ovarian, and pancreatic version 2.2022 — March 9, 2022
Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Haney E, Holmes R (2019) Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 322(7):666–685. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.8430 . (PMID: 31429902)
doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.8430
pubmed: 31429902
O’Neill SC, Mays D, Partenaude AF, Garber JE, DeMarco TA, Peshkin BN, Schneider KA, Tercyak KP (2015) Women’s concerns about the emotional impacts of awareness of heritable breast cancer risk and its implications for their children. J Commun Gen 6:55–62
doi: 10.1007/s12687-014-0201-5
Paluch-Shimon S et al (2016) Prevention and screening in BRCA mutation carriers and other breast/ovarian hereditary cancer syndromes: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for cancer prevention and screening. Ann Oncol 27:v103–v110
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw327
pubmed: 27664246
Russo A, Incorvaia L, Capoluongo E, Tagliaferri P, Gori S, Cortesi L, Genuardi M et al (2022) Implementation of preventive and predictive BRCA testing in patients with breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer: a position paper of Italian Scientific Societies. ESMO Open 7 (3):100459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100459
Segal J, Esplen MJ, Toner B et al (2004) An investigation of the disclosure process and support needs of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Am J Med Genet A 125A:267–272
doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.20485
pubmed: 14994235
Shatz MT, Hanoch Y, Katz BA, Doniger GM, Ozanne EM (2015) Willingness to test for BRCA 1/2 in high risk women: Influenced by perception and family experience, rather than by objective or subjective numeracy? Judgement and Decision Making 10(4):386–399
doi: 10.1017/S1930297500005180
Shkedi-Rafid S, Gabai-Kapara E, Grinshpun-Cohen J, Levy-Lahad E (2012) BRCA genetic testing of individuals from families with low prevalence of cancer: experiences of carriers and implications for population screening. Genet Med 14(7):688–694. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2012.31 . (PMID: 22481128)
doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.31
pubmed: 22481128
Tercyak KP, Peshkin BN, DeMarco TA, Brogan BM, Lerman C (2002) Parent-child factors and their effect on communicating BRCA1/2 test results to children. Patient Educ Couns 47(2):145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-3991(01)00192-6 . (PMID: 12191538)
doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(01)00192-6
pubmed: 12191538