1
|
Afaya A, Kim SW, Park HS, Lim MC, Jung MS, Nam EJ, Park JS, Jeong J, Ryu JM, Kim J, Kim J, Kim M, Jin J, Han J, Kim SY, Park SY, Katapodi MC, Kim S. Psychosocial barriers and facilitators for cascade genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a scoping review. Fam Cancer 2024; 23:121-132. [PMID: 38662264 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-024-00379-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2023] [Accepted: 03/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Abstract
Despite increased awareness and availability of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome for over 20 years, there is still significant underuse of cascade genetic testing among at-risk relatives. This scoping review synthesized evidence regarding psychosocial barriers and facilitators of family communication and/or uptake of cascade genetic testing in relatives from HBOC families. Search terms included 'hereditary breast and ovarian cancer' and 'cascade genetic testing' for studies published from 2012-2022. Through searching common databases, and manual search of references, 480 studies were identified after excluding duplications. Each article was reviewed by two researchers independently and 20 studies were included in the final analysis. CASP, RoBANS 2.0, RoB 2.0, and MMAT were used to assess the quality of included studies. A convergent data synthesis method was used to integrate evidence from quantitative and narrative data into categories and subcategories. Evidence points to 3 categories and 12 subcategories of psychosocial barriers and facilitators for cascade testing: (1) facilitators (belief in health protection and prevention; family closeness; decisional empowerment; family support, sense of responsibility; self-efficacy; supportive health professionals); (2) bidirectional concepts (information; perception of genetic/cancer consequences; negative emotions and attitude); and (3) barriers (negative reactions from family and negative family dynamics). Healthcare providers need to systematically evaluate these psychosocial factors, strengthen facilitators and alleviate barriers to promote informed decision-making for communication of genetic test results and uptake of genetic testing. Bidirectional factors merit special consideration and tailored approaches, as they can potentially have a positive or negative influence on family communication and uptake of genetic testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Agani Afaya
- College of Nursing, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Health and Allied Sciences, Ho, Ghana
| | - Sung-Won Kim
- Department of Breast Surgery, Breast Care Center, Dairim St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyung Seok Park
- Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Myong Cheol Lim
- Division of Tumor Immunology, Center for Gynecologic Cancer, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Mi Sook Jung
- College of Nursing, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea
| | - Eun Ji Nam
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Women's Life Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ji Soo Park
- Hereditary Cancer Clinic, Cancer Prevention Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Joon Jeong
- Department of Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jai Min Ryu
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - JiSun Kim
- Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jihye Kim
- College of Nursing, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
| | | | - Juhye Jin
- Department of Nursing, Korea National University of Transportation, Jeungpyeong, Korea
| | - Jeehee Han
- Red Cross College of Nursing, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Soo Yeon Kim
- College of Nursing, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
- Korea Armed Forces Nursing Academy, Daejeon, Korea
| | - Sun-Young Park
- College of Nursing, Daegu Catholic University, Daegu, South Korea
| | - Maria C Katapodi
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Sue Kim
- College of Nursing, Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Slade E, Berg L, Dworzynski K, Manchanda R. Ovarian cancer: identifying and managing familial and genetic risk-summary of new NICE guidance. BMJ 2024; 385:q807. [PMID: 38724099 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.q807] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/15/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Slade
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London
| | - Laura Berg
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London
| | | | - Ranjit Manchanda
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London
- Barts Health NHS Trust, Royal London Hospital
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Campacci N, Grasel RS, Galvão HDCR, Garcia LF, Ribeiro PC, Pereira KFDJDS, Goldim JR, Ashton-Prolla P, Palmero EI. The history of families at-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: what are the impacts of genetic counseling and testing? Front Psychol 2024; 15:1306388. [PMID: 38500651 PMCID: PMC10946339 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1306388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Cancer Genetic Counseling (CGC) and genetic testing (GT) assume a paramount role for hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome families. We assessed the effects of CGC and GT on women affected by cancer who are at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer predisposition syndrome (HBOC). Methods This study encompasses four time points: before the CGC session, after the CGC session when blood is drawn for GT, after disclosure of GT results, and six months following disclosure of GT results. The impacts of CGC and GT were assessed using psychosocial questionnaires. Additionally, a pedigree, genogram, and ecomap were constructed through a semistructured interview. Results A total of sixty women were included in the study. Most participants considered their perception of cancer risk to be equivalent to that of the general population, even among those with pathogenic variants. An increased perception of breast and ovarian cancer risks was associated with a heightened inclination toward religious engagement as a coping mechanism. Patients carrying variants of uncertain significance expressed greater concerns about developing another cancer compared to those who had BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type or pathogenic variants. Qualitative analysis of the genograms and ecomaps demonstrated that the CGC/GT processes facilitate communication within families. The genogram analyses revealed the impact of CGC and GT processes on families at risk for hereditary cancer. Changes in some family relationships were observed, and an improvement in communication was noted following the GT process. Discussion These findings can assist healthcare professionals considering a personalized approaches in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalia Campacci
- Molecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil
- Genomic Medicine Service, Hospital A Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Rebeca Silveira Grasel
- Molecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil
- Department of Genetics, Brazilian National Cancer Institute, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Edenir Inêz Palmero
- Molecular Oncology Research Center, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil
- Department of Genetics, Brazilian National Cancer Institute, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cragun DL, Hunt PP, Dean M, Weidner A, Shields AK, Tezak A, Pal T. Applying the framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions to increase family communication about hereditary cancer. PEC INNOVATION 2023; 2:100133. [PMID: 37214492 PMCID: PMC10194404 DOI: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2023.100133] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2022] [Revised: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Objective Evaluate an intervention to increase family communication (FC) of positive hereditary cancer test results using the Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions (FDECI). Methods We developed 'programme theory' during the FDECI development phase by aligning intervention components with behavior change techniques (BCTs) and theoretical factors expected to improve FC. During the feasibility phase, we obtained feedback from 12 stakeholder interviews. Results Intervention components aligned with a total of 14 unique BCTs for which prior evidence links the BCT to theoretical factors that influence behavior change. Constructive stakeholder feedback included: more information desired, rewording to support autonomy by highlighting options, and improvements to navigation, visuals, and audio. Positive comments included: comprehensiveness of materials, modeling of conversations, and usefulness of the materials for helping a person prepare to share positive test results. Conclusion The first FDECI phases were helpful for improving the intervention and planning our ongoing effectiveness and future implementation phases. Innovation Our application of the FDECI is novel, including plans to test our 'programme theory' using coincidence analysis (CNA) to determine who accesses which intervention materials, how utilizing certain materials impact the aligned theoretical factors, and whether these in turn make a difference in the behavioral outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah L. Cragun
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Paige Phillips Hunt
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Marleah Dean
- University of South Florida, Department of Communication, Tampa, FL; Health Outcomes & Behavior Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States of America
- Moffitt Cancer Center, Health Outcomes & Behavior Program, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Anne Weidner
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Andrea K. Shields
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Ann Tezak
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Hunter JE, Riddle L, Joseph G, Amendola LM, Gilmore MJ, Zepp JM, Shuster E, Bulkley JE, Muessig KR, Anderson KP, Goddard KAB, Wilfond BS, Leo MC. Most people share genetic test results with relatives even if the findings are normal: Family communication in a diverse population. Genet Med 2023; 25:100923. [PMID: 37421176 PMCID: PMC10766857 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2023.100923] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2023] [Revised: 06/26/2023] [Accepted: 06/29/2023] [Indexed: 07/09/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE With increasing utilization of genetic testing, sharing genetic information can become part of general family health communication while providing biological relatives with important information about their own genetic risk. Importantly, little is known about motivations for and barriers to family communication of genetic information in historically underserved populations. METHODS Using mixed methods, we explored patient experiences with family communication in a study population of English- and Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 to 49 years, enriched for participants from historically underserved backgrounds. Risk screening for hereditary cancer guided genetic testing for cancer risk genes and other medically actionable findings. RESULTS Most participants overall (91%), including most with normal findings (89%), shared or planned to share their results with relatives. Common motivations for sharing results were to give relatives information about their genetic risk and because the participant thought the results were interesting. Reasons for not sharing were limited contact with relatives, perceptions of limited clinical utility for relatives, and concern that discussion of genetic information was stigmatized or taboo. CONCLUSION Results demonstrate high rates of sharing genetic information, indicate motivations for sharing go beyond facilitating genetic testing for relatives, and suggest general willingness to share genetic information as part of family health communication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Ezzell Hunter
- Genomics, Ethics, and Translational Research Program, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC; Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR.
| | - Leslie Riddle
- Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | - Galen Joseph
- Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
| | | | - Marian J Gilmore
- Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| | - Jamilyn M Zepp
- Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| | | | - Joanna E Bulkley
- Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| | - Kristin R Muessig
- Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| | - Katherine P Anderson
- Department of Family Medicine, Ambulatory Care Services, Denver Health, Denver, CO
| | - Katrina A B Goddard
- Department of Translational and Applied Genomics, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| | - Benjamin S Wilfond
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA
| | - Michael C Leo
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Luetke Lanfer H, Reifegerste D, Berg A, Memenga P, Baumann E, Weber W, Geulen J, Müller A, Hahne A, Weg-Remers S. Understanding Trust Determinants in a Live Chat Service on Familial Cancer: Qualitative Triangulation Study With Focus Groups and Interviews in Germany. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e44707. [PMID: 37610815 PMCID: PMC10483292 DOI: 10.2196/44707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Revised: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/06/2023] [Indexed: 08/24/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In dealing with familial cancer risk, seeking web-based health information can be a coping strategy for different stakeholder groups (ie, patients, relatives, and those suspecting an elevated familial cancer risk). In the vast digital landscape marked by a varied quality of web-based information and evolving technologies, trust emerges as a pivotal factor, guiding the process of health information seeking and interacting with digital health services. This trust formation in health information can be conceptualized as context dependent and multidimensional, involving 3 key dimensions: information seeker (trustor), information provider (trustee), and medium or platform (application). Owing to the rapid changes in the digital context, it is critical to understand how seekers form trust in new services, given the interplay among these different dimensions. An example of such a new service is a live chat operated by physicians for the general public with personalized cancer-related information and a focus on familial cancer risk. OBJECTIVE To gain a comprehensive picture of trust formation in a cancer-related live chat service, this study investigates the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their respective relevant characteristics based on a model of trust in web-based health information. In addition, the study aims to compare these characteristics across the 3 different stakeholder groups, with the goal to enhance the service's trustworthiness for each group. METHODS This qualitative study triangulated the different perspectives of medical cancer advisers, advisers from cancer support groups, and members of the public in interviews and focus group discussions to explore the 3 dimensions of trust-trustor, trustee, and application-and their determinants for a new live chat service for familial cancer risk to be implemented at the German Cancer Information Service. RESULTS The results indicate that experience with familial cancer risk is the key trustor characteristic to using, and trusting information provided by, the live chat service. The live chat might also be particularly valuable for people from minority groups who have unmet needs from physician-patient interactions. Participants highlighted trustee characteristics such as ability, benevolence, integrity, and humanness (ie, not a chatbot) as pivotal in a trustworthy cancer live chat service. Application-related characteristics, including the reputation of the institution, user-centric design, modern technology, and visual appeal, were also deemed essential. Despite the different backgrounds and sociodemographics of the 3 stakeholder groups, many overlaps were found among the 3 trust dimensions and their respective characteristics. CONCLUSIONS Trust in a live chat for cancer information is formed by different dimensions and characteristics of trust. This study underscores the importance of understanding trust formation in digital health services and suggests potential enhancements for effective, trustworthy interactions in live chat services (eg, by providing biographies of the human medical experts to differentiate them from artificial intelligence chatbots).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Annika Berg
- School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Paula Memenga
- Department of Journalism and Communication Research, Hochschule für Musik, Theater und Medien Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Eva Baumann
- Department of Journalism and Communication Research, Hochschule für Musik, Theater und Medien Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Winja Weber
- Krebsinformationsdienst, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wells I, Zemedikun DT, Simons G, Stack RJ, Mallen CD, Raza K, Falahee M. Predictors of the likelihood that patients with rheumatoid arthritis will communicate information about rheumatoid arthritis risk to relatives: A quantitative assessment. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2023; 112:107713. [PMID: 37003160 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2022] [Revised: 02/10/2023] [Accepted: 03/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
First-degree relatives (FDRs) of people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are increasingly recruited to prediction and prevention studies. Access to FDRs is usually via their proband with RA. Quantitative data on predictors of family risk communication are lacking. RA patients completed a questionnaire assessing likelihood of communicating RA risk information to their FDRs, demographic variables, disease impact, illness perceptions, autonomy preferences, interest in FDRs taking a predictive test for RA, dispositional openness, family functioning, and attitudes towards predictive testing. Ordinal regression examined associations between patients' characteristics and their median likelihood of communicating RA risk to FDRs. Questionnaires were completed by 482 patients. The majority (75.1%) were likely/extremely likely to communicate RA risk information to FDRs, especially their children. Decision-making preferences, interest in FDRs taking a predictive test, and beliefs that risk knowledge would increase people's empowerment over their health increased patients' odds of being likely to communicate RA risk information to FDRs. Beliefs that risk information would cause stress to their relatives decreased odds that patients would be likely to communicate RA risk. These findings will inform the development of resources to support family communication about RA risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Imogen Wells
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Dawit T Zemedikun
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Gwenda Simons
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Rebecca J Stack
- Institute of Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Christian D Mallen
- Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, David Weatherall Building, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom
| | - Karim Raza
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom; MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research and the Research into Inflammatory Arthritis Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Marie Falahee
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Harrison C, Bartley N, Jacobs C, Best M, Vatter S, Meiser B, Ballinger ML, Thomas DM, Butow P. Family communication and results disclosure after germline sequencing: A mixed methods study. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2023; 114:107800. [PMID: 37210765 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107800] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Revised: 05/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/23/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Research on family communication of germline genome sequencing (GS) results (versus of genetic results after targeted genetic testing) is still emerging, yet potentially complex results increase the importance of communicating risk to relatives. Promoting equity by ensuring patients have sufficient health literacy to interpret results is important in this context. This study aimed to identify cancer patients' perceived importance of result disclosure, predictors of perceptions, and perspectives on family communication. METHODS This explanatory-sequential, cross-sectional mixed-methods study involved participants (n = 246) completing a questionnaire and (n = 20) a semi-structured interview. Ordinal logistic regressions determined associations between potential predictors and perceived importance of result disclosure. Interview transcripts were analysed thematically using a constant-comparative approach. RESULTS More participants intended disclosing to nuclear (77.4%) than to extended family (42.7%). More than half (59.3%) felt results were family information; 62.7% believed it was important to disclose results to family members. Nuclear and extended family communication scores and education level were significantly positively associated with perceived importance of disclosure (p < 0.05). Six qualitative themes were identified: i) Responsibility to inform, ii) Choice, iii) Autonomy, iv) Family Communication, v) Significance of results, and vi) Health professional role. CONCLUSION Low health literacy and family conflict can complicate communication of GS results. Patients seek clear, interpretable information in a format they can easily communicate. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Healthcare professionals can facilitate discussion of GS results by offering written information, encouraging disclosure, exploring existing family dynamics and communication patterns, and offering strategies to improve family communication. Centralised genetic communication offices and chatbots can also be helpful.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Camelia Harrison
- Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Nicci Bartley
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Chris Jacobs
- Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Megan Best
- Institute for Ethics and Society, The University of Notre Dame, Sydney, Australia
| | - Sabina Vatter
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Bettina Meiser
- School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Mandy L Ballinger
- Cancer Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | - David M Thomas
- Cancer Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | - Phyllis Butow
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; School of Psychology, Centre of Medical Psychology and Evidence-Based Decision-Making, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lima E, Esplen MJ, Martins F, Alves M, Sales CMD. Communication about hereditary cancer risk to offspring: A systematic review of children's perspective. Psychooncology 2023. [PMID: 37114280 DOI: 10.1002/pon.6141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2022] [Revised: 03/31/2023] [Accepted: 04/03/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The present review describes how children experience hereditary cancer risk communication within the family. METHODS Searches for studies between 1990 and 2020 on PubMed and EBSCO were undertaken, and 15 studies met the inclusion criteria, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The findings informed: (1) how, when and what is discussed about hereditary cancer risk in the family; (2) how does family communication about hereditary cancer risk impact children on psychosocial and behavioral outcomes; (3) what are the child's preferences regarding hereditary cancer risk communication within the family. RESULTS Disclosure is done mostly by both parents, or mothers only, which is in accordance with the children's preferences. Children value open communication about cancer risk with their parents, although they report experiences of fear, surprise, feeling unhappy, and concern about the increased risk of cancer. Regardless of the method of disclosure, children may be particularly sensitive to their parent's emotional state at the time of disclosure, and they learn from their parents' experiences the potential implications of cancer risk. Children also report that it would be helpful to learn more about genetic cancer syndromes via written materials, and/or meet a genetic counselor. CONCLUSIONS Children rely on their parents as the primary models of the hereditary cancer experience. Therefore, parents play a central role in the psychological adjustment of children. Findings point to the relevance of family-centered care in hereditary cancer risk that targets not only the mutation carrier individually but also their children and partners.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esperança Lima
- Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Center for Psychology, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Mary Jane Esplen
- Department of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Filipa Martins
- Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Center for Psychology, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Marisa Alves
- Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - Célia M D Sales
- Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
- Department of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Finn CM, McCormick S, Peterson D, Niendorf KB, Rodgers LH. Motivation and family communication in hereditary prostate cancer genetic testing: Survey of patients from a US tertiary medical center. J Genet Couns 2023; 32:79-89. [PMID: 35941805 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1624] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2021] [Revised: 07/08/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Identification of a hereditary prostate cancer in an affected individual can guide treatment and may also impact cancer screening and surveillance for patients and their relatives. This study aimed to determine the factors that are associated with the decision-making process of individuals with prostate cancer regarding whether to pursue genetic testing as well as how, why, and with whom genetic test results are shared. We surveyed 113 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer who received cancer genetic counseling through a United States tertiary medical center, inquiring about genetic testing motivations and family communication about results. Among those who pursued genetic testing, (1) learning about my family's possible cancer risk (98%), (2) learning information that may guide cancer treatment (93%), and (3) learning if I am at risk for future cancers (92%) were most frequently identified as slightly or very important factors in their decision. Participants shared their genetic test results in a higher proportion to male first-degree relatives than female first-degree relatives; however, no significant difference was found (p = 0.103). Our study may suggest sex differences related to family communication about genetic testing results. Such findings indicate a critical need for genetic counselors to clearly communicate the impact of genetic test results on both male and female relatives. Further research on motivation and family communication about genetic test results in diverse cohorts is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin M Finn
- MGH Institute of Health Professions Genetic Counseling Program, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Massachusetts General Hospital, Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Shelley McCormick
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Danielle Peterson
- MGH Institute of Health Professions Genetic Counseling Program, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Kristin B Niendorf
- MGH Institute of Health Professions Genetic Counseling Program, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Linda H Rodgers
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Young AL, Imran A, Spoelma MJ, Williams R, Tucker KM, Halliday J, Forrest LE, Wakefield CE, Butow PN. Proband-mediated interventions to increase disclosure of genetic risk in families with a BRCA or Lynch syndrome condition: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:18-34. [PMID: 36253533 PMCID: PMC9822896 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01200-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2022] [Revised: 08/19/2022] [Accepted: 09/20/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Interventions to assist family communication about inherited cancer risk have the potential to improve family cancer outcomes. This review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of proband-mediated interventions employed within genetics clinics to increase disclosure of genetic risk to at-risk relatives. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PubMed and PsycINFO were searched for publications between 1990-2020. The quality of studies was assessed. From 5605 records reviewed, 9 studies (4 randomised control trials and 5 cohort studies) were included involving families with BRCA1, BRCA2 and Lynch syndrome. Intervention delivery modes included genetic counselling with additional telephone or in-person follow-up, letters, videos, and decision aids. The percentages of at-risk relatives informed by the proband about their risk ranged from 54.0% to 95.5% in the intervention or family-mediated comparison group. Of those who were informed, 24.4-60.0% contacted a genetics clinic and 22.8-76.2% had genetic testing after they were counselled at a genetics clinic. Significant differences between intervention and control group were reported on all three outcomes by one study, and with relatives contacting a genetics clinic by another study. The studies suggest but do not conclusively show, that tailored genetic counselling with additional follow-up can increase both the proportion of informed relatives and relatives who contact the genetics clinic. With the increase in germline testing, interventions are required to consider the family communication process and address post-disclosure variables (e.g., relative's perceptions, emotional reactions) through engagement with probands and relatives to maximise the public health benefit of identifying inherited cancer risk in families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Luk Young
- grid.266842.c0000 0000 8831 109XSchool of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW Australia
| | - Aalya Imran
- grid.412703.30000 0004 0587 9093Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Michael J. Spoelma
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Discipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Rachel Williams
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW Australia ,grid.415193.bPrince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW Australia
| | - Katherine M. Tucker
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW Australia ,grid.415193.bPrince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW Australia
| | - Jane Halliday
- grid.1058.c0000 0000 9442 535XMurdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC Australia ,grid.1008.90000 0001 2179 088XDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC Australia
| | - Laura E. Forrest
- grid.1055.10000000403978434Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC Australia ,grid.1008.90000 0001 2179 088XSir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC Australia
| | - Claire E. Wakefield
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Women’s and Children’s Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XBehavioral Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Randwick, NSW Australia
| | - Phyllis N. Butow
- grid.1013.30000 0004 1936 834XSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
McNamara N, Feeney M, Giltenane M, Dowling M. Breast cancer genetic mutation: Synthesis of women's experience. J Clin Nurs 2022. [PMID: 36016506 DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16498] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 08/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES To systematically identify and synthesise the experiences reported by women with a breast cancer mutation who do not have cancer as reported in qualitative research published between 2013 and 2020. BACKGROUND Women carrying a BReast CAncer (BRC) genetic mutation have an increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer. They must engage in emotional decision-making regarding risk management strategies to prevent cancer, including risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. DESIGN AND METHODS The ENTREQ statement guided this review. Eight databases were systematically searched (CINAHL, Pubmed, Embase, Psychinfo [Ovid], Web of Science, Scopus, Proquest and Lenus). Synthesis was guided by "best fit" framework. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme guided assessment of methodological limitations and confidence in the review findings was informed by GRADE-CERQual. RESULTS Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria for synthesis. Six themes were synthesised from the included studies (anxiety; family planning; it's a family affair; empowerment; actions; pragmatic adjustments). CONCLUSIONS The multidimensional experiences of women living with a BRCA1/2 mutation require an individualised response based on women's needs at their life stages. A decision coaching model adopted during consultations could support women to guide decision-making regarding cancer risk-reducing strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nichola McNamara
- Symptomatic Breast Unit, University Hospital Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - Meghan Feeney
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Martina Giltenane
- Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| | - Maura Dowling
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Wynn J, Milo Rasouly H, Vasquez-Loarte T, Saami AM, Weiss R, Ziniel SI, Appelbaum PS, Wright Clayton E, Christensen KD, Fasel D, Green RC, Hain HS, Harr M, Hoell C, Kullo IJ, Leppig KA, Myers MF, Pacyna JE, Perez EF, Prows CA, Kulchak Rahm A, Campbell-Salome G, Sharp RR, Smith ME, Wiesner GL, Williams JL, Blout Zawatsky CL, Gharavi AG, Chung WK, Holm IA. Do research participants share genomic screening results with family members? J Genet Couns 2021; 31:447-458. [PMID: 34665896 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2021] [Revised: 08/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/04/2021] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
The public health impact of genomic screening can be enhanced by cascade testing. However, cascade testing depends on communication of results to family members. While the barriers and facilitators of family communication have been researched following clinical genetic testing, the factors impacting the dissemination of genomic screening results are unknown. Using the pragmatic Electronic Medical Records and Genomics Network-3 (eMERGE-3) study, we explored the reported sharing practices of participants who underwent genomic screening across the United States. Six eMERGE-3 sites returned genomic screening results for mostly dominant medically actionable disorders and surveyed adult participants regarding communication of results with first-degree relatives. Across the sites, 279 participants completed a 1-month and/or 6-month post-results survey. By 6 months, only 34% of the 156 respondents shared their results with all first-degree relatives and 4% did not share with any. Over a third (39%) first-degree relatives were not notified of the results. Half (53%) of participants who received their results from a genetics provider shared them with all first-degree relatives compared with 11% of participants who received their results from a non-genetics provider. The most frequent reasons for sharing were a feeling of obligation (72%) and that the information could help family members make medical decisions (72%). The most common reasons indicated for not sharing were that the family members were too young (38%), or they were not in contact (25%) or not close to them (25%). These data indicate that the professional returning the results may impact sharing patterns, suggesting that there is a need to continue to educate healthcare providers regarding approaches to facilitate sharing of genetic results within families. Finally, these data suggest that interventions to increase sharing may be universally effective regardless of the origin of the genetic result.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Wynn
- Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hila Milo Rasouly
- Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Tania Vasquez-Loarte
- Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Akilan M Saami
- Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robyn Weiss
- Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sonja I Ziniel
- Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Paul S Appelbaum
- Department of Psychiatry, Center for Research on Ethical, Legal & Social Implications of Psychiatric, Neurologic & Behavior Genetics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ellen Wright Clayton
- Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society and Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Department of Population Medicine, Precision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - David Fasel
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert C Green
- Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Heather S Hain
- Center for Applied Genomics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Margaret Harr
- Center for Applied Genomics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Christin Hoell
- Center for Genetic Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Iftikhar J Kullo
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Kathleen A Leppig
- Genetic Services and Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Kaiser Permanente of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Melanie F Myers
- Divisions of Human Genetics and Patient Services, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Joel E Pacyna
- Biomedical Ethics Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Emma F Perez
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Cynthia A Prows
- Divisions of Human Genetics and Patient Services, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | | | | | | | - Maureen E Smith
- Center for Genetic Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Georgia L Wiesner
- Division of Genetic Medicine, Department of Medicine, and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | | | | | - Ali G Gharavi
- Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wendy K Chung
- Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ingrid A Holm
- Division of Genetics and Genomics and the Manton Center for Orphan Diseases Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.,Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Dwyer AA, Hesse-Biber S, Shea H, Zeng Z, Yi S. Coping response and family communication of cancer risk in men harboring a BRCA mutation: A mixed methods study. Psychooncology 2021; 31:486-495. [PMID: 34582073 DOI: 10.1002/pon.5831] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2021] [Revised: 09/14/2021] [Accepted: 09/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Providing genetic counseling and genetic testing to at-risk blood relatives (cascade screening) is important for improving BRCA cancer outcomes. Intra-familial communication of risk is critical for cascade screening efforts yet relatively little is known about men's role in communicating BRCA risk. We sought to examine men's coping response to their BRCA status and intra-familial communication of risk to inform the development of tailored interventions that could promote cascade screening. METHODS We employed a sequential mixed-methods design. First, we measured coping response (quantitative) using the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA). MICRA scores were compared between BRCA+ men, BRCA- men and BRCA+ women. Subsequently, we used template analysis to analyze qualitative interviews exploring coping and intra-familial communication of risk. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) served as a guiding framework for identifying intervention targets. RESULTS BRCA+ men (n = 36) had significantly higher levels of distress (p < 0.001), uncertainty (p < 0.001) and negative experiences (p < 0.05) compared to BRCA- male counterparts (n = 23). BRCA+ men had significantly lower distress (p < 0.001) and uncertainty (p < 0.001) than BRCA+ women (n = 406). Qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with BRCA+ men (n = 35) identified promoters and barriers to active coping response and intra-familial communication of risk. Mapping results onto the TPB identified targets for tailoring person-centered approaches for men addressing beliefs/attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. CONCLUSIONS Men and women appear to have different coping responses to learning their BRCA status. Developing tailored (sex-based), theory informed interventions may help promote intra-familial communication of BRCA risk and support cascade screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew A Dwyer
- William F. Connell School of Nursing, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA.,Munn Center for Nursing Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Hannah Shea
- Department of Sociology, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Ziwei Zeng
- Lynch School of Education and Human Development, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Shiya Yi
- Department of Measurement, Evaluation, Statistics and Assessment, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Conley CC, Otto AK, McDonnell GA, Tercyak KP. Multiple approaches to enhancing cancer communication in the next decade: translating research into practice and policy. Transl Behav Med 2021; 11:2018-2032. [PMID: 34347872 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibab089] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Communicating risk and other health information in a clear, understandable, and actionable manner is critical for the prevention and control of cancer, as well as the care of affected individuals and their family members. However, the swift pace of development in communication technologies has dramatically changed the health communication landscape. This digital era presents new opportunities and challenges for cancer communication research and its impact on practice and policy. In this article, we examine the science of health communication focused on cancer and highlight important areas of research for the coming decade. Specifically, we discuss three domains in which cancer communication may occur: (a) among patients and their healthcare providers; (b) within and among families and social networks; and (c) across communities, populations, and the public more broadly. We underscore findings from the prior decade of cancer communication research, provide illustrative examples of future directions for cancer communication science, and conclude with considerations for diverse populations. Health informatics studies will be necessary to fully understand the growing and complex communication settings related to cancer: such works have the potential to change the face of information exchanges about cancer and elevate our collective discourse about this area as newer clinical and public health priorities emerge. Researchers from a wide array of specialties are interested in examining and improving cancer communication. These interdisciplinary perspectives can rapidly advance and help translate findings of cancer communication in the field of behavioral medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire C Conley
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Amy K Otto
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Glynnis A McDonnell
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kenneth P Tercyak
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Experiences of BRCA1/2 Gene Mutation-Positive Women With Cancer in Communicating Genetic Risk to Their Relatives. Cancer Nurs 2021; 44:E142-E150. [PMID: 32022782 DOI: 10.1097/ncc.0000000000000796] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND When a woman is diagnosed with hereditary breast or ovarian cancer, family members may be at high risk of cancers associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutation and benefit from disclosure of the genetic test result. This duty of informing relatives may be distressing, or relatives may not be properly informed. OBJECTIVE To qualitatively describe breast cancer patients' experiences communicating genetic risk of cancer to their relatives. METHODS Probands with BRCA1/2 gene mutations were recruited from an oncology institute in Istanbul, Turkey, and interviewed by telephone. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to derive central elements of the 30 women's experiences communicating genetic risk to their relatives. RESULTS Six themes were identified: response to genetic test results, reason for communication, feelings about communication, reflection after communication, results of communication, and needs. CONCLUSION Women with cancer found to have BRCA1/2 gene mutations tended to share their genetic test results within the family. The main motives for sharing test results were the desire to encourage relatives to get tested and moral and ethical convictions. Women needed explicit information regarding cancer risk and risk-reducing strategies to act upon. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The women's feelings and reflections about the communication process were varied and suggest that personalized genetic risk communication interventions may better support women with BRCA1/2 gene mutations during and after communication with relatives. Long-term follow-up of those women is essential because of the need for informed decision on risk-reducing strategies.
Collapse
|
17
|
Smit AK, Bartley N, Best MC, Napier CE, Butow P, Newson AJ, Tucker K, Ballinger ML, Thomas DM, Jacobs C, Meiser B, Goldstein D, Savard J, Juraskova I. Family communication about genomic sequencing: A qualitative study with cancer patients and relatives. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2021; 104:944-952. [PMID: 33129629 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2020] [Revised: 09/15/2020] [Accepted: 10/15/2020] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study explored family communication about undertaking genomic sequencing, and intentions to communicate pertinent heritable results to family members. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted with cancer patients (n = 53) and their relatives (n = 20) who underwent germline genome sequencing or molecular tumor testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS Key themes relevant to family communication about undertaking sequencing included: perceiving family member interest, delaying discussion until results were received, having shared capacity to understand and cope, and having open communication in the family. Intended communication subsequent to receiving results was affected by: disease severity, risk management options, degree of closeness in the family, sense of responsibility, and potential adverse impacts on family. Resource and support needs varied based on the complexity of test results, health professionals' availability, and disease severity. Unique subthemes were identified for specific subgroups. CONCLUSION Current findings support the need to assess the impact and resource needs specific to each clinical application of genomic sequencing. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Increasingly sophisticated and complex clinical genomic sequencing warrants development of family-centered interventions and resources to facilitate preference-sensitive communication about genomic sequencing, including disseminating relevant information to family members.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amelia K Smit
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Sydney, Australia; The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Health Ethics, Sydney, Australia; The University of Sydney, Melanoma Institute Australia, Australia.
| | - Nicci Bartley
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Sydney, Australia
| | - Megan C Best
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Health Ethics, Sydney, Australia; The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Sydney, Australia
| | - Christine E Napier
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | - Phyllis Butow
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Sydney, Australia
| | - Ainsley J Newson
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Health Ethics, Sydney, Australia
| | - Kathy Tucker
- Hereditary Cancer Clinic, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Mandy L Ballinger
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia; St Vincent's Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - David M Thomas
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia; St Vincent's Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Chris Jacobs
- University of Technology Sydney, Graduate School of Health, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Bettina Meiser
- Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - David Goldstein
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Ilona Juraskova
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Haddad JM, Robison K, Beffa L, Laprise J, ScaliaWilbur J, Raker CA, Clark MA, Hofstatter E, Dalela D, Brown A, Bradford L, Toland M, Stuckey A. Family planning in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants. J Genet Couns 2021; 30:1570-1581. [PMID: 33904624 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2020] [Revised: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/21/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing breast and ovarian malignancies. Given the risks and significant ramifications of undergoing risk-reducing surgeries, many pathogenic variant carriers unaffected by cancer (previvors) struggle with family planning and reproductive decision making. The objective of this study was to determine the attitudes and practices of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers with respect to family planning decision making. A cross-sectional survey was conducted of BRCA1 and BRCA2 previvors at four Northeastern medical centers. The survey was administered electronically via email using REDCap. The survey included demographic information as well as questions about genetic testing, prophylactic surgeries, family planning, and partnering. Data were analyzed with Fisher's exact tests and t tests. The survey was completed by 139 of 422 BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers (response rate 33%). Thirteen were excluded from analysis due to self-reported cancer history. Of the remaining 126, 21 (16.7%) were male and 105 (83.3%) were female. Female participants <35 years old at the time of genetic testing were significantly more likely than those 35 or greater to report feeling urgency to have a family after finding out about their BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant (p < 0.0001). Younger women also reported their genetic status had a stronger impact on their romantic relationships (p = 0.029). Men were significantly more likely to report that they felt no urgency to have a family compared to women (p < 0.0001). Our study reflects the complex decision making for previvors and the intricacies of family planning in this population. Providers can use this knowledge as a guide to counsel patients about reproductive options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica M Haddad
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Katina Robison
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Lindsey Beffa
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jessica Laprise
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Jennifer ScaliaWilbur
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Christina A Raker
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Melissa A Clark
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Erin Hofstatter
- Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program, Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Disha Dalela
- Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program, Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Amy Brown
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hartford Healthcare Cancer Institute, Hartford, CT, USA
| | - Leslie Bradford
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Maine Medical Partners, Scarborough, ME, USA
| | - Maris Toland
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Maine Medical Partners, Scarborough, ME, USA
| | - Ashley Stuckey
- Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, Women and Infants' Hospital, Cancer Genetics and Prevention Program and The Breast Health Center Program in Women's Oncology, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Psychological Distress and Coping Ability of Women at High Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer before Undergoing Genetic Counseling-An Exploratory Study from Germany. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2021; 18:ijerph18084338. [PMID: 33921890 PMCID: PMC8073852 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18084338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2021] [Revised: 03/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Carriers of pathogenic variants causing hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are confronted with a high risk to develop malignancies early in life. The present study aimed to determine the type of psychological distress and coping ability in women with a suspicion of HBOC. In particular, we were interested if the self-assessed genetic risk had an influence on health concerns and coping ability. Using a questionnaire established by the German HBOC Consortium, we investigated 255 women with breast cancer and 161 healthy women before they were seen for genetic counseling. The group of healthy women was divided into groups of high and low self-assessed risk. In our study, healthy women with a high self-assessed risk stated the highest stress level and worries about their health and future. A quarter of the women requested psychological support. Overall, only few women (4–11%) stated that they did not feel able to cope with the genetic test result. More women (11–23%, highest values in the low-risk group) worried about the coping ability of relatives. The results of our exploratory study demonstrate that the women, who presented at the Department of Human Genetics, Hanover Medical School, Germany were aware of their genetic risk and had severe concerns about their future health, but still felt able to cope with the genetic test result.
Collapse
|
20
|
Dean M, Tezak AL, Johnson S, Pierce JK, Weidner A, Clouse K, Pal T, Cragun D. Sharing genetic test results with family members of BRCA, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM carriers. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2021; 104:720-725. [PMID: 33455826 PMCID: PMC8005459 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2020] [Revised: 12/05/2020] [Accepted: 12/22/2020] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study explored motivators and challenges/barriers to sharing personal genetic test results (GTR) with family members (FM). METHODS Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 62 women who had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in aBRCA, PALB2, CHEK2, or ATM gene. Selective qualitative data analysis focused on eliciting motivators and challenges/barriers identified by participants when sharing their GTR with FM. RESULTS Motivators to sharing personal GTR with FM included: health protection and prevention; moral obligation; decisional empowerment; familial ties; written resources; and contextualization for a familial cause for cancer. Challenges/barriers to family sharing included: concern for FM reactions; complexities of information; lack of closeness; perceived relevance; and emotional impact. CONCLUSIONS All motivators and challenges/barriers were identified across BRCA and non-BRCA carriers, demonstrating commonalities in family sharing of GTR among high- to moderate-penetrance hereditary BC (breast cancer) genes. Despite challenges/barriers, participants disclosed their GTR with most close FM, yet restrictions in communication and/or strain on the timing, manner of disclosing, and strategies used varied across certain FM. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS These findings offer healthcare providers and researchers preliminary practical implications for broadly improving family sharing interventions across P/LP variants in BC risk genes by demonstrating important elements to include in family sharing letters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marleah Dean
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
| | - Ann L Tezak
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in the Department of Medicine, Division of Genetic Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Sabrina Johnson
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Joy K Pierce
- Cleveland Clinic, Indian River Hospital, Vero Beach, FL, USA
| | - Anne Weidner
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in the Department of Medicine, Division of Genetic Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Kate Clouse
- Department of Nursing, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in the Department of Medicine, Division of Genetic Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Logeman C, Cho Y, Sautenet B, Rangan GK, Gutman T, Craig J, Ong A, Chapman A, Ahn C, Coolican H, Tze-Wah Kao J, Gansevoort RT, Perrone R, Harris T, Torres V, Fowler K, Pei Y, Kerr P, Ryan J, Johnson D, Viecelli A, Geneste C, Kim H, Kim Y, Howell M, Ju A, Manera KE, Teixeira-Pinto A, Parasivam G, Tong A. 'A sword of Damocles': patient and caregiver beliefs, attitudes and perspectives on presymptomatic testing for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: a focus group study. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e038005. [PMID: 33040007 PMCID: PMC7549480 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Presymptomatic testing is available for early diagnosis of hereditary autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). However, the complex ethical and psychosocial implications can make decision-making challenging and require an understanding of patients' values, goals and priorities. This study aims to describe patient and caregiver beliefs and expectations regarding presymptomatic testing for ADPKD. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS 154 participants (120 patients and 34 caregivers) aged 18 years and over from eight centres in Australia, France and Korea participated in 17 focus groups. Transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS We identified five themes: avoiding financial disadvantage (insecurity in the inability to obtain life insurance, limited work opportunities, financial burden); futility in uncertainty (erratic and diverse manifestations of disease limiting utility, taking preventive actions in vain, daunted by perplexity of results, unaware of risk of inheriting ADPKD); lacking autonomy and support in decisions (overwhelmed by ambiguous information, medicalising family planning, family pressures); seizing control of well-being (gaining confidence in early detection, allowing preparation for the future, reassurance in family resilience); and anticipating impact on quality of life (reassured by lack of symptoms, judging value of life with ADPKD). CONCLUSIONS For patients with ADPKD, presymptomatic testing provides an opportunity to take ownership of their health through family planning and preventive measures. However, these decisions can be wrought with tensions and uncertainty about prognostic implications, and the psychosocial and financial burden of testing. Healthcare professionals should focus on genetic counselling, mental health and providing education to patients' families to support informed decision-making. Policymakers should consider the cost burden and risk of discrimination when informing government policies. Finally, patients are recommended to focus on self-care from an early age.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte Logeman
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yeoungjee Cho
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network, University of Queensland at Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- Department of Nephrology Hypertension, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Tours, Tours, France
| | - Gopala K Rangan
- Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, The Westmead Institute for Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Renal Medicine, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Talia Gutman
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jonathan Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Albert Ong
- Academic Nephrology Unit, The Henry Wellcome Laboratories for Medical Research, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - Arlene Chapman
- Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Curie Ahn
- Internal Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Helen Coolican
- Head Office, Polycystic Kidney Disease Foundation of Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Juliana Tze-Wah Kao
- School of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan
- Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ron T Gansevoort
- Faculty of Medical Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald Perrone
- Division of Nephrology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Tess Harris
- Head Office, PKD International, Geneva, Switzerland
- London Office, PKD International, London, UK
| | - Vincent Torres
- Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, New York, USA
| | - Kevin Fowler
- Kidney Health Initiative, The Voice of the Patient, Washington, DC, USA
| | - York Pei
- Divisions of Nephrology and Genomic Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Peter Kerr
- Nephrology, Monash Medical Centre Clayton, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jessica Ryan
- Nephrology, Monash Medical Centre Clayton, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David Johnson
- Department of Renal Medicine, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland, Australia
| | - Andrea Viecelli
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network, University of Queensland at Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Clair Geneste
- Department of Nephrology and Clinical Immunology, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Tours, Tours, France
| | - Hyunsuk Kim
- Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Jongno-gu, South Korea
| | - Yaerim Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University College of Medicine, Daegu, South Korea
| | - Martin Howell
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Karine E Manera
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Armando Teixeira-Pinto
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gayathri Parasivam
- Discipline of Genetic Medicine, The University of Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Clinical Genetics, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network Randwick and Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
From Probands to Relatives: Communication of Genetic Risk for Hereditary Breast-Ovarian Cancer and Its Influence on Subsequent Testing. Cancer Nurs 2020; 45:E91-E98. [PMID: 32804756 DOI: 10.1097/ncc.0000000000000876] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The genetic risk communication from proband to relatives varies from family to family, and patients often need support with the communication of genetic test results and making decisions to manage hereditary cancer risks. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to characterize the communication of BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genetic risk from proband to first-degree relatives (FDRs) using a social network framework. METHODS We characterized network and nonnetwork factors to explore their association with which FDRs were told about the genetic risk and whether or not relatives underwent genetic testing. Ninety-two female probands with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer who have confirmed BRCA1/2 mutations participated in the study. Communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk was assessed between 92 probands and their 417 FDRs. RESULTS Of 92 probands, 94.5% (n = 87) communicated their genetic test result to at least one of their FDRs. Of FDRs older than 18 years, 19.9% (n = 72) have genetic testing. Emotional closeness, educational level of the proband, and relative's age were significantly associated with communicating test results with FDRs. CONCLUSION Communication of genetic risk with the FDRs after having a BRCA1/2 gene-mutation-positive test result was high in this group of cancer patients. However, the rate of genetic testing among FDRs was low. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Probands' educational level and age of relatives for cascade genetic screening should be considered during counseling. Interventions to support women with BRCA1/2 mutations during the communication process and their family members' engagement in testing and risk-reducing strategies are needed.
Collapse
|
23
|
Parent of Origin Effects on Family Communication of Risk in BRCA+ Women: A Qualitative Investigation of Human Factors in Cascade Screening. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:cancers12082316. [PMID: 32824510 PMCID: PMC7464326 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12082316] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2020] [Revised: 08/08/2020] [Accepted: 08/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Pathogenic germline variants in Breast Cancer 1/2 (BRCA) genes confer increased cancer risk. Understanding BRCA status/risk can enable family cascade screening and improve cancer outcomes. However, more than half of the families do not communicate family cancer history/BRCA status, and cancer outcomes differ according to parent of origin (i.e., maternally vs. paternally inherited pathogenic variant). We aimed to explore communication patterns around family cancer history/BRCA risk according to parent of origin. We analyzed qualitative interviews (n = 97) using template analysis and employed the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to identify interventions to improve communication. Interviews revealed sub-codes of ‘male stoicism and ‘paternal guilt’ that impede family communication (template code: gender scripting). Conversely, ‘fatherly protection’ and ‘female camaraderie’ promote communication of risk. The template code ‘dysfunctional family communication’ was contextualized by several sub-codes (‘harmful negligence’, ‘intra-family ignorance’ and ‘active withdrawal of support’) emerging from interview data. Sub-codes ‘medical misconceptions’ and ‘medical minimizing’ deepened our understanding of the template code ‘medical biases’. Importantly, sub-codes of ‘informed physicians’ and ‘trust in healthcare’ mitigated bias. Mapping findings to the TPB identified variables to tailor interventions aimed at enhancing family communication of risk and promoting cascade screening. In conclusion, these data provide empirical evidence of the human factors impeding communication of family BRCA risk. Tailored, theory-informed interventions merit consideration for overcoming blocked communication and improving cascade screening uptake.
Collapse
|
24
|
The role and value of family therapy for people living with cancer: a rapid review of recent evidence. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care 2020; 14:263-269. [PMID: 32740272 DOI: 10.1097/spc.0000000000000504] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Cancer impacts the whole family and relational system, not just the individual with the diagnosis. The present article identifies and reviews publications in the field of family therapy and cancer since 2019, to describe the theoretical models and techniques applied, and the outcomes achieved. RECENT FINDINGS A search of databases and grey literature led to the identification of five articles from four studies. Four papers described primary research and one summarized a case example. Papers were published by teams in the USA, Sweden and Iceland. Each article described the benefits of adopting a family therapy approach on outcomes such as family communication, bereavement and decreased carer burden. Four papers described specialist family therapists delivering the interventions, and one used oncology nurses drawing on the theories and techniques of family therapy. SUMMARY The rarity of family therapy publications in the past year reflects the individual-level approach to cancer which permeates both medicine and talking therapies. The utility of family therapy could be further surfaced through more large-scale studies which thoroughly describe the unique theoretical basis and techniques, alongside outcomes for multiple people within the family system.
Collapse
|
25
|
Young AL, Butow PN, Tucker KM, Wakefield CE, Healey E, Williams R. Challenges and strategies proposed by genetic health professionals to assist with family communication. Eur J Hum Genet 2019; 27:1630-1638. [PMID: 31189929 PMCID: PMC6871519 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-019-0447-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2019] [Revised: 05/24/2019] [Accepted: 05/31/2019] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Hereditary genetic conditions have implications for the whole family and therefore genetic health professionals (GHPs) interact with multiple family members, sometimes individually and sometimes in aggregate. Family communication is important to ensure dissemination of genetic information to potentially affected relatives and to facilitate supportive family interactions around genetic testing and risk management decisions. Yet, little is known about how GHPs perceive and manage these interactions. A total of 73 GHPs working across Australian cancer genetic clinics participated in semi-structured focus groups or interviews to elucidate what aspects of family communication they found most challenging, the strategies they used, and whether current academic training provides sufficient guidance to address familial concerns. Patients' lack of understanding about the importance of communicating genetic information to at-risk relatives was the most common challenge reported. GHPs reported that the patients' concern for their families' emotional responses as well as wider family system challenges (e.g. estrangement) affected family communication. Common strategies during consultations included structuring appointments logistically to account for family dynamics and post-consultation use of family letters and follow-up appointments. GHPs generally felt equipped with the skills and training provided to address patient concerns, but also desired upskilling in techniques relating to systemic family issues and behavioural change. Reflective practice strategies were requested by geneticists and nurses to foster therapeutic skill usage. Additional family therapy training while on the job may be beneficial in order to meet current challenges faced in clinical practice and can be provided as further professional development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison L Young
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Centre for Medical Psychology & Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- Behavioural Sciences Unit proudly supported by the Kids with Cancer Foundation, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
| | - Phyllis N Butow
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Centre for Medical Psychology & Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED), Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Katherine M Tucker
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| | - Claire E Wakefield
- Behavioural Sciences Unit proudly supported by the Kids with Cancer Foundation, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- School of Women's and Children's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Emma Healey
- Illawarra Cancer Care Centre, Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, NSW, Australia
| | - Rachel Williams
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Young AL, Butow PN, Tucker KM, Williams R, Healey E, Wakefield CE. Health professional and at-risk BRCA young adult perspectives about information needs: What does Gen Y need to know? J Genet Couns 2019; 28:1154-1165. [PMID: 31538377 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2019] [Revised: 08/23/2019] [Accepted: 08/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Young adults at risk of a hereditary condition require the provision of accurate information to make an informed decision about genetic testing and risk management options. At-risk young adults' (18- to 40-year olds) preferences for information and resources, and genetic-related health professionals' (GHPs) views on young adults' information needs, are largely unknown in the literature. This study aimed to clarify and compare the information needs of emerging (18- to 25-year olds) and early (26- to 40-year olds) adults. Resource preferences of young adults were also explored. Findings are drawn from two datasets: questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with at-risk young adults from BRCA1 or BRCA2 families (N = 32), and focus groups with GHPs (N = 73) working in Australian familial cancer clinics. Both datasets were analyzed using framework analysis. Emerging adults, particularly those who had not attended a clinic, wanted to know the rationale for genetic testing and basic genetic facts. Early adults were concerned about reproductive issues and cancer risk for future or current children. Information needs reported by young adults but not reported by GHPs include male cancer risk, finding reputable information, understanding test results (e.g., negative), and understanding risk terminology (e.g., lifetime cancer risk). Young adults' satisfaction with current information received was suboptimal, yet uptake of genetic-related resources was generally low. Getting information to this cohort remains a challenge for GHPs. Emerging adults showed a preference to obtain information through technologically-based formats (e.g., websites, social media), whereas early adults used a wider range of formats (e.g., websites, booklets). Awareness of and access to genetic information prior to genetic clinic attendance is needed. A review of the utility of current resources available for at-risk young adults would be helpful.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Luk Young
- Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Behavioral Sciences Unit Proudly Supported by the Kids with Cancer Foundation, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| | - Phyllis N Butow
- Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Katherine M Tucker
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.,Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| | - Rachel Williams
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.,Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| | - Emma Healey
- Illawarra Cancer Care Centre, Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, NSW, Australia
| | - Claire E Wakefield
- Behavioral Sciences Unit Proudly Supported by the Kids with Cancer Foundation, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia.,School of Women's and Children's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|