Psychological impact of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: an update of the literature

A content analysis of parents' reflections on pathogenic and uncertain pediatric oncology germline sequencing results

Germline genomic sequencing is increasingly integrated into pediatric cancer care, with pathogenic cancer-predisposing variants identified among 5-18% of affected children and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in up to 70%. Given the potential medical implications for children and their families, parents' psychosocial responses to learning results are important to understand. Parents of children with cancer who learned their children's germline pathogenic or VUS results following paired tumor and germline genomic sequencing described their cognitive and affective responses to results in an open-ended write-in question after disclosure (M = 10 months post-disclosure; range = 1-28). Responses were coded and categorized using content analysis, then compared across results using chi-square and Fisher's exact test. Parents of children with pathogenic (n = 9), VUS (n = 52), and pathogenic plus VUS results (n = 9) described negative emotions, positive reactions, mixed emotions (i.e., positive and negative emotions), and neutral reactions. Negative emotions were described significantly more frequently with pathogenic results than VUS only (χ2 = 5.19; p = .02), with peace of mind and empowerment only described for those with VUS. Parents also described approach(es) to coping (e.g., faith, plan of action) and reactions specific to the uncertainty of VUS (e.g., disappointment at no explanation for cancer etiology). A subset with VUS described decreasing worry/distress with increased understanding of results, whereas others displayed misconceptions regarding VUS. Screening for emotional adjustment is warranted for parents of children with cancer receiving pathogenic germline results, and screening for understanding is warranted with VUS. Findings highlight the importance of pre-and posttest genetic counseling.

Using polygenic risk modification to improve breast cancer prevention: study protocol for the PRiMo multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Established personal and familial risk factors contribute collectively to a woman's risk of breast or ovarian cancer. Existing clinical services offer genetic testing for pathogenic variants in high-risk genes to investigate these risks but recent information on the role of common genomic variants, in the form of a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS), has provided the potential to further personalise breast and ovarian cancer risk assessment. Data from cohort studies support the potential of an integrated risk assessment to improve targeted risk management but experience of this approach in clinical practice is limited.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The polygenic risk modification trial is an Australian multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial of integrated risk assessment including personal and family risk factors with inclusion of breast and ovarian PRS vs standard care. The study will enrol women, unaffected by cancer, undergoing predictive testing at a familial cancer clinic for a pathogenic variant in a known breast cancer (BC) or ovarian cancer (OC) predisposition gene (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, RAD51C, RAD51D). Array-based genotyping will be used to generate breast cancer (313 SNP) and ovarian cancer (36 SNP) PRS. A suite of materials has been developed for the trial including an online portal for patient consent and questionnaires, and a clinician education programme to train healthcare providers in the use of integrated risk assessment. Long-term follow-up will evaluate differences in the assessed risk and management advice, patient risk management intentions and adherence, patient-reported experience and outcomes, and the health service implications of personalised risk assessment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and at all participating centres. Study findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, and directly to participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621000009819.

Factors associated with psychological distress during genetic counseling in high-risk women with breast cancer in Turkey

PURPOSE

This study aims to shed light on the rather neglected area of research of psychological distress in women facing genetic counselling in Turkey, where few institutions providing such counselling exist.

METHODS

105 breast cancer patients presenting for genetic testing completed a sociodemographic and clinical questionnaire as well as validated structured questionnaires including the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S/T) and the Health Motivation Sub-dimension of Champion's Health Belief Model Scale.

RESULTS

69.5% of the participants had lost a family member from cancer; 80% said the term "cancer" elicited negative thoughts (e.g., death, fear, and incurable disease). 62.9% and 37.1% attributed cancer to stress or sorrow, and genetic susceptibility, respectively. There was a negative association between health motivation and BDI scores (r:-0.433, p < 0.001). Married individuals had higher BDI and STAI-S scores (p = 0.001, p = 0.01 respectively), as well as lower STAI-T scores (p = 0.006). BDI, STAI-S and STAI-T scores were higher in those refusing genetic testing (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.003 respectively) and those with metastases (p = 0.03, p = 0.01, p = 0.03 respectively). Furthermore, individuals with low health motivation were more likely to exhibit high BDI scores (p < 0.001) and low STAI-T scores (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Common perceptions and beliefs about cancer and genetic testing during genetic counselling were found to have a negative impact on distress in high-risk women with breast cancer. The negative relationship between psychological distress and health motivation may reduce patients' compliance with genetic counselling recommendations. A comprehensive psychological evaluation should be considered as an important part of genetic counselling.

Patients' Perceptions and Attitudes to the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Narrative Review

Breast cancer remains the most prevalent cancer among women worldwide, necessitating advancements in diagnostic methods. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into mammography has shown promise in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. However, understanding patient perspectives, particularly considering the psychological impact of breast cancer diagnoses, is crucial. This narrative review synthesizes literature from 2000 to 2023 to examine breast cancer patients' attitudes towards AI in breast imaging, focusing on trust, acceptance, and demographic influences on these views. Methodologically, we employed a systematic literature search across databases such as PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Scopus, selecting studies that provided insights into patients' perceptions of AI in diagnostics. Our review included a sample of seven key studies after rigorous screening, reflecting varied patient trust and acceptance levels towards AI. Overall, we found a clear preference among patients for AI to augment rather than replace the diagnostic process, emphasizing the necessity of radiologists' expertise in conjunction with AI to enhance decision-making accuracy. This paper highlights the importance of aligning AI implementation in clinical settings with patient needs and expectations, emphasizing the need for human interaction in healthcare. Our findings advocate for a model where AI augments the diagnostic process, underlining the necessity for educational efforts to mitigate concerns and enhance patient trust in AI-enhanced diagnostics.

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 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.

Parent Quality of Life After Disclosure of Pediatric Oncology Germline Sequencing Results

PURPOSE

To characterize parents' quality of life (QoL) after germline genomic sequencing for their children with cancer.

METHODS

Participants were n = 104 parents of children with cancer enrolled in a prospective study of clinical tumor and germline genomic sequencing. Parents completed surveys at study consent (T0), before disclosure of their child's germline results (T1), and again ≥5 weeks after results disclosure (T2). Bivariate associations with QoL were examined, followed by a multivariable regression model predicting parents' psychological distress.

RESULTS

At T2, parental distress significantly differed by their children's germline result type (positive, uncertain, negative; P = .038), parent relationship status (P = .04), predisclosure genetics knowledge (P = .006), and predisclosure worry about sequencing (P < .001). Specifically, parents of children with positive (ie, pathogenic or likely pathogenic) results experienced greater distress than those of children with negative results (P = .029), as did parents who were single, more knowledgeable about genetics, and with greater worry. In the adjusted regression model, a positive germline result remained significantly associated with parents' lower QoL at T2 follow-up (F [4,92] = 9.95; P < .001; R2 = .30; β = .19; P = .031).

CONCLUSION

Germline genomic sequencing for children with cancer is associated with distress among parents when revealing an underlying cancer predisposition among their affected children. Genetic education and counseling before and after germline sequencing may help attenuate this impact on QoL by addressing parents' concerns about test results and their health implications. Assessing parents' worry early in the testing process may also aid in identifying those most likely in need of psychosocial support.

Assessing Psychological Morbidity in Cancer-Unaffected BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers: A Systematic Review

Female BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers have an increased lifetime risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Cancer-unaffected women who are newly diagnosed with this pathogenic variant may experience psychological distress because of imminent health threat. No comprehensible review on psychological morbidity in cancer-unaffected BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers is currently available. This review aims to give an overview about all available the studies in which psychological outcomes have been assessed in cancer-unaffected BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers, whether as a primary outcome or secondary measurement. A systematic search across four databases (Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO) was conducted. Studies had to report on cancer-unaffected pathogenic variant carriers (exclusively or separately) and use a validated measure of psychological morbidity to be eligible. Measures were only included if they were used in at least three studies. The final review consisted of 45 studies from 13 countries. Distress measures, including anxiety and cancer worry, were most often assessed. Most studies found a peak of distress immediately after genetic test result disclosure, with a subsequent decline over the following months. Only some studies found elevated distress in carriers compared to non-carriers in longer follow-ups. Depression was frequently investigated but largely not found to be of clinical significance. Quality of life seemed to be largely unaffected by a positive genetic test result, although there was some evidence that younger women, especially, were less satisfied with their role functioning in life. Body image has been infrequently assessed so far, but the evidence suggested that there may be a decrease in body image after genetic test result disclosure that may decrease further for women who opt for a prophylactic mastectomy. Across all the outcomes, various versions of instruments were used, often limiting the comparability among the studies. Hence, future research should consider using frequently used instruments, as outlined by this review. Finally, while many studies included cancer-unaffected carriers, they were often not reported on separately, which made it difficult to draw specific conclusions about this population.

The research landscape of the quality of life or psychological impact on gynecological cancer patients: A bibliometric analysis

Background

Gynecological cancer is one of the most common cancers in women. The quality of life (QoL) or psychological impact has emerged as an outcome indicator in many clinical trials of gynecological cancer and gained much concern in the clinical setting at the start of the 21st century. Our paper conducted a bibliometric analysis of QoL or psychological impact on gynecological cancer patients to show the status and hotspots.

Methods

Related publications from 2000 to 2022 were included by screening from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) on 26 June 2022. The bibliometrics was analyzed and visualized by bibliometrix R-package, VOSviewer, and CiteSpace V.

Results

A total of 6,479 publications were included in our study. The publications in this field were increased annually. The United States (n = 2,075) was the country with the most published papers. Sydney University (n = 167) was the most productive affiliation. Gynecologic Oncology and Journal of Clinical Oncology were the most relevant and most cited sources, respectively. The article written by Bray F et al. has the highest citation. Kim J and Aaronson NK ranked first in most productive author and most co-cited author, respectively. The keywords "mortality", "fertility preservation", and "palliative care" have bursts till 2022, which represented the frontiers of this field.

Conclusion

Our study provides an overall analysis of QoL or psychological impact on gynecological cancer patients, which can serve as a reference in future research.

Coping Self-Efficacy and Its Relationship with Psychological Morbidity after Genetic Test Result Disclosure: Results from Cancer-Unaffected BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers

Women who are found to carry a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant experience psychological distress due to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. They may decide between different preventive options. In this secondary analysis of data collected alongside a larger randomized controlled trial, we are looking at 130 newly found BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers and how their coping self-efficacy immediately after genetic test result disclosure is related to their psychological burden and status of preventive decision making. Participants received the Coping Self-Efficacy Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Impact of Event Scale, the Decisional Conflict Scale, and the Stage of Decision-Making Scale after positive genetic test result disclosure. We found that women with higher coping self-efficacy showed fewer symptoms of anxiety or depression and were less affected by receiving the genetic test result in terms of post-traumatic stress. However, coping self-efficacy had no relationship with any decision-related criteria, such as decisional conflict or stage of decision making. This shows that despite its buffering capacity on psychological burden, possessing coping self-efficacy does not lead to more decisiveness in preference-sensitive decisions.

Factors Associated with the Uptake of Genetic Testing for Cancer Risks: A Pathway Analysis Using the Health Information National Trends Survey Data

Our study aimed to identify pathways from the source of information to the uptake of cancer genetic testing, with consideration of intermediate variables including perceptional, attitudinal and psychosocial factors. We used the Health Information National Trends Survey (2020 database) and constructed a structural equation model for pathway analysis (using SPSS version 24). Variables for socio-demographic, lifestyle and health information were also collected and used for confounding adjustment. A total of 2941 participants were analyzed (68.5%, non-Hispanic white; 59.7%, females; 58 years, median age; and 142 (4.8%) had undertaken genetic testing for cancer risk previously). Our pathway analysis found that only information from particular sources (i.e., healthcare providers and genetic counsellors) had positive and significant effects on people’s perceptions of cancer regarding its prevention, detection and treatment (standardized β range, 0.15−0.31, all p-values < 0.01). Following the paths, these perceptional variables (cancer prevention, detection and treatment) showed considerable positive impacts on the uptake of genetic testing (standardized β (95% CIs): 0.25 (0.20, 0.30), 0.28 (0.23, 0.33) and 0.12 (0.06, 0.17), respectively). Pathways involving attitudinal and psychosocial factors showed much smaller or insignificant effects on the uptake of genetic testing. Our study brings several novel perspectives to the behavior model and may underpin certain issues regarding cancer risk genetic testing.

Genetic testing in adult survivors of retinoblastoma in Denmark: A study of the experience and impact of genetic testing many years after initial diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Survivors with heritable retinoblastoma (RB) face a high risk for second primary cancer and RB in their children. Knowledge of heredity can support second cancer surveillance, convey reproductive options or early diagnosis of RB in their offspring. Currently, all newly diagnosed Danish patients with RB are offered genetic testing, as opposed to a minority of survivors diagnosed before available DNA testing.

OBJECTIVE

To examine RB survivors' response to unsolicited contact, uptake of genetic testing, and RB1 variant detection rate, and to qualitatively evaluate the experience and overall impact of genetic testing for heritable RB.

METHODS

Genetically untested adult RB survivors were invited to receive genetic counseling, undergo genetic testing for heritable RB and complete an eye examination. The number of responses, uptake of genetic testing and genetic results are descriptively reported. Additionally, responding survivors participated in a qualitative interview study of the perceived impact of genetic testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Among invited RB survivors, 58% responded. Of these, 88% opted for genetic counseling and genetic testing. A diagnosis of heritable RB was established in 23% of RB survivors. Interestingly, all of these survivors were unilaterally affected. Analysis of data from the interviews revealed three recurring themes regarding the impact of genetic counseling and testing several years after initial diagnosis: 'Risk of what?', 'Knowledge is important' and 'Impact of the result'. The possible risk ofsecond cancer and RB in their children was new knowledge for several participants; however, in general, the participants appreciated receiving genetic information and certainty about heredity. Accordingly, the impact of genetic counseling and testing was perceived in a positive way.

CONCLUSION

Overall, RB survivors valued the opportunity to receive genetic counseling and undergo genetic testing many years after diagnosis. Responding RB survivors appreciated the invitation to test, felt well-informed and described little decisional conflict regarding their decision-making, valuing the genetic information and certainty. Heritable RB was confirmed in 23% of the previously untested RB survivors. These individuals emphasized the value of knowing and being proactive regarding both reproduction and cancer risk.

Assessment of psychosocial difficulties by genetic clinicians and distress in women at high risk of breast cancer: a prospective study

We examined how often genetic clinicians correctly identify psychosocial difficulties in women at high breast cancer risk and explored effects of this assessment and the genetic test result on counselees’ distress. A prospective observational study of counselee–clinician dyads was performed in three French, German and Spanish genetic clinics, involving 709 counselees (participation rate, 83.4%) and 31 clinicians (participation rate, 100%). Counselee–clinician agreement in perceived psychosocial difficulties was measured after the pre-test genetic consultation. Multivariate mixed linear models accounting for clinicians were tested. Predicted distress levels were assessed after the pre- (T1) and post-test result disclosure consultations (T2). Depending on the difficulty domain, clinicians adequately assessed the presence or absence of difficulties in 51% (“familial issues”) to 59% (“emotions”) of counselees. When counselees’ and clinicians’ perceptions disagreed, difficulties were generally underestimated by clinicians. Counselees’ distress levels remained stable from T1 to T2, irrespective of clinicians’ appraisal adequacy, and the genetic test result disclosure. Psychological referral need were found in 20–42% of counselees, more frequently observed for difficulties in the “emotions” domain. Our findings suggest that the genetic test result is a suboptimal indicator for psychological referral. Instead, clinicians should focus on emotions expressed by counselees to appraise their needs for psychological support.

Optimization of an mHealth lifestyle intervention for families with hereditary cancer syndromes: Study protocol for a multiphase optimization strategy feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Individuals at increased hereditary risk of cancer are an important target for health promotion and cancer prevention interventions. Health-4-Families uses the Multiphase Optimization STrategy (MOST) framework and is designed to pilot digital delivery strategies for a distance-based, 16-week intervention to promote weight management, healthy diet, and increased physical activity among individuals with BRCA1/BRCA2 or DNA mismatch repair (MMR) pathogenic germline variants. This communication describes participant recruitment and the design of the Health-4-Families pilot study.

METHODS

Health-4-Families is a full-factorial (16 condition) randomized pilot study of four lifestyle intervention components: social networking, telephone or email coaching, text messaging, and self-monitoring. The primary outcome was feasibility and satisfaction with these study components. Participants with pathogenic germline variants were identified via clinic surveillance lists and advocacy organizations and were invited to participate with family members. All participants had to report meeting at least one of the following criteria: (1) having a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, (2) consuming <5 servings of fruit and vegetables per day, or (3) getting <150 min of moderate-to-vigorous intensity activity per week.

RESULTS

The majority of screened potential participants with pathogenic variants (83%) were eligible; 86% of those eligible provided informed consent and 79% (n = 104) completed baseline. A total of 206 family members were nominated by study participants and 49% (n = 102) completed baseline.

DISCUSSION

Recruitment data suggest that individuals with pathogenic germline variants, who are at increased risk for hereditary cancers, are motivated to participate in digital lifestyle interventions. This recruitment success highlights the importance of identifying and prioritizing effective and efficient intervention components for hereditary cancer families. We intend to use the outcomes of our pilot study to inform a fully-powered factorial study for this community.

Family Adjustment to Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: A Systematic Review

Hereditary cancer syndromes are inherited pathogenic genetic variants that significantly increase the risk of developing cancer. When individuals become aware of their increased probability of having cancer, the whole family is affected by this new reality and needs to adjust. However, adjustment to hereditary cancer syndromes has been mainly studied at an individual level, and research about familial adjustment remains dispersed and disorganized. To overcome this gap, this review aims to understand how families adjust to genetic testing and risk management, and to what extent the family's adjustment influences the psychological response and risk management behaviors of mutation carriers. We conducted searches on the PubMed/Med Line, PsycInfo, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar databases and used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT-v2018) to assess the methodological quality of each selected study. Thirty studies met the inclusion criteria. Most results highlighted the interdependent nature of adjustment of pathogenic variant carriers and their families. The way carriers adjust to the syndrome is highly dependent on family functioning and related to how family members react to the new genetic information, particularly partners and siblings. Couples who share their worries and communicate openly about cancer risk present a better long-term adjustment than couples who use protective buffering (not talking about it to avoid disturbing the partner) or emotional distancing. Parents need help dealing with disclosing genetic information to their children. These findings reinforce the importance of adopting a family-centered approach in the context of genetic counseling and the necessity of involving family members in research.

Préoccupations et besoins d’aide psychologiques chez les femmes à risque génétique de cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire : une étude prospective observationnelle en Allemagne, Espagne et France

Objectifs et contexte : L’arrivée des tests de panel de gènes a augmenté la complexité de la communication en consultation d’oncogénétique. Une attention quant à l’impact de cette communication sur les préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique s’avère d’autant plus indispensable. Cette étude vise à en quantifier le type et l’ampleur, avant et après la communication du résultat de test génétique, chez des femmes s’adressant à la consultation d’oncogénétique pour réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire en Allemagne, Espagne et France.

Participants et mesures : Parmi les 752 personnes invitées consécutivement à participer à cette étude, 646 (86 %) ― dont 510 (68 %) atteintes d’un cancer du sein―ont répondu à un questionnaire (PAHC (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer)) portant d’une part sur les préoccupations spécifiques à la démarche en oncogénétique et d’autre part sur leurs besoins d’aide psychologique ; questionnaire proposé après la consultation initiale d’oncogénétique initiale (T1) et, pour 460 (61 %) d’entre elles, deux mois après la communication du résultat du test (T2).

Résultats : Soixante-dix-neuf (17,2 %), 19 (4,1 %), 259 (56,3 %), 44 (9,6 %), 59 (12,8 %) femmes ont reçu respectivement les résultats suivants : un variant pathogène sur BRCA1/2 ou sur autre gène à risque élevé ou modéré, un résultat négatif non informatif, un résultat négatif vrai, ou la présence d’un variant dont la signification clinique est incertaine (VUS). Le type de préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique se sont révélés variables selon les pays. Cependant, globalement, les préoccupations les plus fréquentes (> 70 %) étaient relatives à la perte d’un proche familial par cancer, et les moins fréquentes (< 5 %) relatives au soutien des proches. La plupart de ces préoccupations persistent deux mois plus tard, à la suite du résultat de test génétique. En revanche, le besoin d’aide psychologique a globalement diminué sur le plan statistique, excepté, selon le pays, pour les préoccupations familiales/sociales, les difficultés émotionnelles ou les aspects pratiques.

Conclusions : Dans notre étude portant sur des femmes issues de trois pays européens s’adressant à la consultation oncogénétique en vue de réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire, la plupart des préoccupations liées à la situation génétique persistent deux mois après la communication du résultat de test, et les besoins d’aide psychologique se manifestent surtout dans le champ des relations et des émotions.

Psychological predictors of advanced cancer patients' preferences for return of results from comprehensive tumor genomic profiling

This study assessed the psychological predictors of preferences for return of comprehensive tumor genomic profiling (CTGP) results in patients with advanced cancers, enrolled in the Molecular Screening and Therapeutics Program. Patients completed a questionnaire prior to undergoing CTGP. Of the 1434 who completed a questionnaire, 96% would like to receive results that can guide treatment for their cancer, and preference for receiving this type of result was associated with lower tolerance of uncertainty. Sixty-four percent would like to receive results that cannot guide treatment, and lower tolerance of uncertainty, self-efficacy, and perceived importance were associated with this preference. Fifty-nine percent would like to receive variants of unknown significance, which was associated with lower tolerance of uncertainty, higher self-efficacy, and perceived importance. Eighty-six percent wanted to receive germline results that could inform family risk. This was associated with higher self-efficacy, perceived importance, and perceived susceptibility. Although most patients wanted to receive all types of results, given the differing patient preferences regarding the return of results depending on the utility of the different types of results, it appears critical to safeguard patient understanding of result utility to achieve informed patient choices. This should be accompanied by appropriate consent processes.

Genetic Counseling for Men with Prostate Cancer

Germline genetic testing is becoming more prevalent in urology clinics because of precision medicine for prostate cancer treatment. Genetic testing results can also influence cancer screening discussions for patients and/or their families. An important part of germline genetic testing is genetic counseling. This article provides an overview of the historical aspects of genetic counseling, discusses the components needed to provide proper genetic counseling, summarizes genes related to hereditary prostate cancer risk, and reviews genetic privacy and genetic discrimination concerns related to germline genetic testing.

Randomized study of remote telehealth genetic services versus usual care in oncology practices without genetic counselors

Purpose

To examine the benefit of telehealth over current delivery options in oncology practices without genetic counselors.

Methods

Participants meeting cancer genetic testing guidelines were recruited to this multi‐center, randomized trial comparing uptake of genetic services with remote services (telephone or videoconference) to usual care in six predominantly community practices without genetic counselors. The primary outcome was the composite uptake of genetic counseling or testing. Secondary outcomes compare telephone versus videoconference services.

Results

147 participants enrolled and 119 were randomized. Eighty percent of participants in the telehealth arm had genetic services as compared to 16% in the usual care arm (OR 30.52, p < 0.001). Five genetic mutation carriers (6.7%) were identified in the telehealth arm, compared to none in the usual care arm. In secondary analyses, factors associated with uptake were lower anxiety (6.77 vs. 8.07, p = 0.04) and lower depression (3.38 vs. 5.06, p = 0.04) among those who had genetic services. There were no significant differences in change in cognitive or affective outcomes immediately post‐counseling and at 6 and 12 months between telephone and videoconference arms.

Conclusion

Telehealth increases uptake of genetic counseling and testing at oncology practices without genetic counselors and could significantly improve identification of genetic carriers and cancer prevention outcomes.

A Systematic Review on the Impact of Genetic Testing for Familial Melanoma II: Psychosocial Outcomes and Attitudes

BACKGROUND

Although genetic testing for known familial melanoma genes is commercially available, clinical implementation has been restrained as utility is unclear, concerns of causing psychological distress are often cited, and consumer interest and perceptions are not well understood. A review of studies exploring participant-reported psychosocial outcomes and attitudes towards genetic testing for familial melanoma will provide insight into common emotional and cognitive responses.

METHODS

Database searches of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were conducted using a date range of January 1995 to June 2020. Studies examining any psychosocial outcomes alongside genetic testing (real or hypothetical), in participants described as having a high risk of melanoma, were eligible. A narrative synthesis of results was used to describe psychosocial outcomes and summarise participant beliefs and attitudes towards genetic testing.

RESULTS

Limited evidence of adverse psychosocial outcomes was found. No impacts on perceived risk or control were reported, and minimal decisional regret was recorded. Generalised distress was comparable between both genetic mutation carriers and non-carriers, often decreasing over time from pretesting levels. Melanoma-specific distress was frequently higher in carriers than non-carriers; however, this difference was present prior to testing and often associated with personal melanoma history. Overall, participants' attitudes towards testing were largely positive, with benefits more frequently described than limitations, and support for testing minors was strong.

CONCLUSIONS

This review has found evidence of few adverse psychological outcomes following genetic testing. There was no indication of increased distress after genetic test results had been disclosed. If these findings were replicated in additional, larger, diverse populations over a longer follow-up period, this would be compelling evidence to guide clinical recommendations.

Risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes-Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are a communication process to inform and prepare patients for genetic test results and the related medical management. An increasing number of healthcare providers are active in the delivery of cancer risk assessment and testing, which can have enormous benefits for enhanced patient care. However, genetics professionals remain key in the multidisciplinary care of at-risk patients and their families, given their training in facilitating patients' understanding of the role of genetics in cancer development, the potential psychological, social, and medical implications associated with cancer risk assessment and genetic testing. A collaborative partnership of non-genetics and genetics experts is the ideal approach to address the growing number of patients at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The goal of this practice resource is to provide allied health professionals an understanding of the key components of risk assessment for HBOC as well as the use of risk models and published guidelines for medical management. We also highlight what patient types are appropriate for genetic testing, what are the most appropriate test(s) to consider, and when to refer individuals to a genetics professional. This practice resource is intended to serve as a resource for allied health professionals in determining their approach to delivering comprehensive care for families and individuals facing HBOC. The cancer risk and prevalence figures in this document are based on cisgender women and men; the risks for transgender or non-binary individuals have not been studied and therefore remain poorly understood.

Practical Considerations and Challenges for Germline Genetic Testing in Patients With Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Germline Genetics Working Group of the PCCTC

Germline genetic testing is now routinely recommended for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) because of expanded guidelines and options for targeted treatments. However, integrating genetic testing into oncology and urology clinical workflows remains a challenge because of the increased number of patients with PCa requiring testing and the limited access to genetics providers. This suggests a critical unmet need for genetic services outside of historical models. This review addresses current guidelines, considerations, and challenges for PCa genetic testing and offers a practical guide for genetic counseling and testing delivery, with solutions to help address potential barriers and challenges for both providers and patients. As genetic and genomic testing become integral to PCa care, developing standardized systems for implementation in the clinic is essential for delivering precision oncology to patients with PCa and realizing the full scope and impact of genetic testing.

Psychosocial implications of living with familial risk of a psychiatric disorder and attitudes to psychiatric genetic testing: A systematic review of the literature

The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing evidence documenting the psychosocial implications of living with a familial risk of an adult-onset psychiatric disorder. Six databases were searched systematically to identify qualitative and quantitative studies, which explored perspectives of those at increased risk for psychiatric disorders, as well as the general public. Thematic analysis was used to identify major themes. Thirty-five articles met the eligibility criteria and reported on the views of 4,896 participants. The literature demonstrates strong interest in psychiatric genetic testing of adults as well as children, whereas attitudes toward prenatal testing were much less positive. Predictors of interest in testing, as well as perceived advantages and disadvantages were identified. Very few studies are available on anticipated and actual reactions to receiving results. Studies show that the majority of participants feel that having a genetic explanation would alleviate some of the stigma associated with mental illness. This review shows that interest in, and predictors of attitudes toward, psychiatric genetic testing are well researched, but the extent to which attitudes will translate into actual testing uptake is unknown. Future research also needs to assess the actual behavioral and psychological impact of genetic testing.

Metastatic breast cancer patient perceptions of somatic tumor genomic testing

BACKGROUND

To assess metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient psychological factors, perceptions, and comprehension of tumor genomic testing.

METHODS

In a prospective, single institution, single-arm trial, patients with MBC underwent next-generation sequencing at study entry with sequencing results released at progression. Patients who completed surveys before undergoing sequencing were included in the present secondary analysis (n = 58). We administered four validated psychosocial measures: Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Trust in Physician Scale, and Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for Cancer. Genetic comprehension was assessed using 7-question objective and 6-question subjective measures. Longitudinal data were assessed (n = 40) using paired Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar's test of agreement.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the beginning and end of study in depression, anxiety, physician trust, or self-efficacy (median time on study: 7.6 months). Depression and anxiety were positively associated with each other and both negatively associated with self-efficacy. Self-efficacy decreased from pre- to post-genomic testing (p = 0.05). Objective genetics comprehension did not significantly change from pre- to post-genomic testing, but patients expressed increased confidence in their ability to teach others about genetics (p = 0.04). Objective comprehension was significantly lower in non-white patients (p = 0.02) and patients with lower income (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the only study, to our knowledge, to longitudinally evaluate multiple psychological metrics in MBC as patients undergo tumor genomic testing. Overall, psychological dimensions remained stable over the duration of tumor genomic testing. Among patients with MBC, depression and anxiety metrics were negatively correlated with patient self-efficacy. Patients undergoing somatic genomic testing had limited genomic knowledge, which varied by demographic groups and may warrant additional educational intervention.

CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION

NCT01987726, registered November 13, 2013.

Psychosocial impact of prognostic genetic testing in uveal melanoma patients: a controlled prospective clinical observational study

BACKGROUND

The risk of metastases in uveal melanoma can accurately be estimated through genetic analysis of the tumor. A growing number of patients decide to receive information on their prognosis, although this can be extremely burdensome. Studies on the psychosocial impact of testing are sparse. The objective of this study was to examine traits of patients opting for prognostication, to investigate its psychosocial impact and the use of psycho-oncological services over time. We further examined characteristics of patients utilizing these services and risk factors of prolonged psychological distress.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This study is a non-randomized controlled prospective clinical observational trial. Patients availing for prognostication formed the test group, while those who opted out constituted the observational group. The psychosocial impact of genetic testing was assessed with the following variables: resilience, social support, fear of tumor progression, depression, general distress, health-related quality of life, estimation of the perceived risk, and the utilization of psycho-oncological interventions. Data were assessed at five different time points over a period of 12 months. We applied binary logistic regression analysis, multiple linear regressions and a mixed model.

RESULTS

Of 175 patients, 63 decided to obtain prognostic information. Treatment method (enucleation > brachytherapy), lower social support and higher general distress could significantly predict patient's choice for prognostic testing. After result announcement, perceived risk of metastases was significantly increased in patients with poor prognosis, while it decreased in those with good prognosis. Overall, a significant decrease over time appeared concerning fear of progression, general distress, depression and anxiety. Mental quality of life increased over time. The utilization of psycho-oncological interventions increased significantly after prognostication; however, this was equivalent in the test and observational groups. Female sex, higher general distress and higher anxiety predicted greater use of psycho-oncological interventions.

DISCUSSION

Availing of prognostic testing is not associated with poorer subsequent psychological well-being. It rather may help to alleviate distress and promote a more realistic risk perception. However, psychological support should be available to all patients, independent of prognosis and treatment, especially considering that patients with low social support and high distress increasingly opt for prognostication.

Psychosocial problems in women attending French, German and Spanish genetics clinics before and after targeted or multigene testing results: an observational prospective study

OBJECTIVES AND SETTING

Advances in multigene panel testing for cancer susceptibility has increased the complexity of counselling, requiring particular attention to counselees' psychosocial needs. Changes in psychosocial problems before and after genetic testing were prospectively compared between genetic test results in women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic susceptibility in French, German and Spanish clinics.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASURES

Among 752 counselees consecutively approached, 646 (86%) were assessed after the initial genetic consultation (T1), including 510 (68%) affected with breast cancer, of which 460 (61%) were assessed again after receiving the test result (T2), using questionnaires addressing genetic-specific psychosocial problems (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer (PAHC)-six scales). Sociodemographic and clinical data were also collected.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine (17.2%), 19 (4.1%), 259 (56.3%), 44 (9.6%) and 59 (12.8%) women received a BRCA1/2, another high/moderate-risk pathogenic variant (PV), negative uninformative, true negative (TN) or variant of uncertain significance result (VUS), respectively. On multiple regression analyses, compared with women receiving another result, those with a VUS decreased more in psychosocial problems related to hereditary predisposition (eg, coping with the test result) (ß=-0.11, p<0.05) and familial/social issues (eg, risk communication) (ß=-0.13, p<0.05), almost independently from their problems before testing. Women with a PV presented no change in hereditary predisposition problems and, so as women with a TN result, a non-significant increase in familial/social issues. Other PAHC scales (ie, emotions, familial cancer, personal cancer and children-related issues) were not affected by genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic risk in European genetics clinics, psychosocial problems were mostly unaffected by genetic testing. Apart from women receiving a VUS result, those with another test result presented unchanged needs in counselling in particular about hereditary predisposition and familial/social issues.

Parental disclosure of positive BRCA1/2 mutation status to children 10 years after genetic testing

The disclosure of genetic information is an important issue in cancer prevention. This study based on a French national cohort of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (GENEPSO-PS cohort, N=233) aimed to assess the prevalence of parental disclosure of genetic information to children 10 years after genetic testing, with a focus on gender differences. Most participants (n = 193, 131 women) reported having children. A total of 72.0% of offspring had received genetic information (88.8% for adult offspring, p < .001), with no differences according to the gender of the mutation-carrying parent. While female carriers disclosed genetic information more often than male carriers (54.1% versus 38.3%, p = .029), they did so irrespective of the gender of their offspring. Moreover, female carriers who had developed incident cancer after genetic testing disclosed genetic information more frequently than unaffected female carriers (70.7% versus 48.5%, p = .005). A multivariate analysis confirmed the effects of both gender and cancer on disclosure to offspring. The same results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to adult offspring. This study reveals high rates of disclosure of positive BRCA1/2 mutation status to children 10 years after genetic testing, irrespective of the gender of the carrier/offspring. However, female carriers disclosed genetic information more frequently than male carriers.

"I remember how I felt, but I don't remember the gene": Families' experiences of cancer-related genetic testing in childhood

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing in children for hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes (CPSs) involves unique psychosocial and family-systems considerations. This retrospective study explored the perspectives and emotional reactions of parents and young adults about cancer-related genetic counseling and testing offered to children in the family.

METHODS

Families were eligible if they had considered genetic testing for a child (≤18 years) within the family. Parents and young adults ≥16 years participated in semistructured interviews that we coded and identified key themes. We also quantitively assessed emotional distress, quality of life, impact of receiving genetic cancer risk information, and service-related satisfaction.

RESULTS

From 35 interviews (26 parents, nine young adults), we identified themes spanning families' experiences from referral to genetic services to the longer term impact of receiving information about family cancer risk from testing of children. Supported by quantitative data, families generally described positive experiences of genetic services and reported benefits to genetic testing. Nevertheless, families faced unique emotional and relational challenges that changed over the family lifecycle. Those challenges differed according to whether the child was asymptomatic or had a cancer diagnosis at testing. Parents of children with cancer described genetic consultations as a secondary concern to the immediate stressors of their child's treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the successful integration of cancer genetics into pediatric cancer care requires specialist pediatric genetic counseling and psychosocial support services that are able to respond to families' changing needs.

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

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

Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review

Genetic testing of patients with cancer is increasingly offered to guide management, resulting in a growing need for oncology health professionals to communicate genetics information and facilitate informed decision-making in a short time frame. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise what is known about health professionals' communication about genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with cancer patients. Four databases were systematically searched using a recognised scoping review method. Areas and types of research were mapped and a narrative synthesis of the findings was undertaken. Twenty-nine papers from 25 studies were included. Studies were identified about (i) information needs, (ii) process and content of genetic counselling, (iii) cognitive and emotional impact, including risk perception and recall, understanding and interpretation of genetic test results, and anxiety and distress, (iv) patients' experiences, (v) communication shortly after diagnosis and (vi) alternatives to face-to-face genetic counselling. Patients' need for cancer-focused, personalised information is not always met by genetic counselling. Genetic counselling tends to focus on biomedical information at the expense of psychological support. For most patients, knowledge is increased and anxiety is not raised by pre-test communication. However, some patients experience anxiety and distress when results are disclosed, particularly those tested shortly after diagnosis who are unprepared or unsupported. For many patients, pre-test communication by methods other than face-to-face genetic counselling is acceptable. Research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from genetic counselling and support and to investigate communication about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer by oncology health professionals.

Psychosocial impact of undergoing prostate cancer screening for men with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations

OBJECTIVES

To report the baseline results of a longitudinal psychosocial study that forms part of the IMPACT study, a multi-national investigation of targeted prostate cancer (PCa) screening among men with a known pathogenic germline mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes.

PARTICPANTS AND METHODS

Men enrolled in the IMPACT study were invited to complete a questionnaire at collaborating sites prior to each annual screening visit. The questionnaire included sociodemographic characteristics and the following measures: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Impact of Event Scale (IES), 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36), Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer, Cancer Worry Scale-Revised, risk perception and knowledge. The results of the baseline questionnaire are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 432 men completed questionnaires: 98 and 160 had mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, respectively, and 174 were controls (familial mutation negative). Participants' perception of PCa risk was influenced by genetic status. Knowledge levels were high and unrelated to genetic status. Mean scores for the HADS and SF-36 were within reported general population norms and mean IES scores were within normal range. IES mean intrusion and avoidance scores were significantly higher in BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers than in controls and were higher in men with increased PCa risk perception. At the multivariate level, risk perception contributed more significantly to variance in IES scores than genetic status.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to report the psychosocial profile of men with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations undergoing PCa screening. No clinically concerning levels of general or cancer-specific distress or poor quality of life were detected in the cohort as a whole. A small subset of participants reported higher levels of distress, suggesting the need for healthcare professionals offering PCa screening to identify these risk factors and offer additional information and support to men seeking PCa screening.

Reconceptualizing harms and benefits in the genomic age

As new, high-powered sequencing technologies are increasingly incorporated into genomics research, we believe that there has been a break point in how risks and benefits associated with genetic information are being characterized and understood. Genomic sequencing provides the potential benefit of a wealth of information, but also has the potential to alter how we conceptualize risks of sequencing. Until now, our conceptions of risks and benefits have been generally static, arising out of the early ethical, legal and social implications studies conducted in the context of targeted genetics. This paper investigates how the increasing availability of genetic information is changing views about risks and benefits, particularly examining our evolving understanding of psychosocial harms and our expanding conception of benefit. We argue that the lack of robust empirical evidence of psychosocial harms and the expanding view that benefits of genomic research include indirect familial benefit necessitate continued ethical, legal and social implications research.

Coping Mechanisms, Psychological Distress, and Quality of Life Prior to Cancer Genetic Counseling

Background: Breast Cancer susceptibility genes 1 and 2 are implicated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and women can test for the presence of these genes prior to developing cancer. The goal of this study is to examine psychological distress, quality of life, and active coping mechanisms in a sample of women during the pre-test stage of the genetic counseling process, considering that pre-test distress can be an indicator of post-test distress. We also wanted to identify if subgroups of women, defined based on their health status, were more vulnerable to developing distress during the genetic counseling process. Methods: This study included 181 female participants who accessed a Cancer Genetic Counseling Clinic. The participants were subdivided into three groups on the basis of the presence of a cancer diagnosis: Affected patients, Ex-patients, and Unaffected participants. Following a self-report questionnaire, a battery of tests was administered to examine psychological symptomatology, quality of life, and coping mechanisms. Results: The results confirm that the genetic counseling procedure is not a source of psychological distress. Certain participants were identified as being more vulnerable than others; in the pre-test phase, they reported on average higher levels of distress and lower quality of life. These participants were predominantly Ex-patients and Affected patients, who may be at risk of distress during the counseling process. Conclusions: These findings highlight that individuals who take part in the genetic counseling process are not all the same regarding pre-test psychological distress. Attention should be paid particularly to Ex-patients and Affected patients by the multidisciplinary treating team.

Patient experience and utility of genetic information: a cross-sectional study among patients tested for cancer susceptibility and thrombophilia

We evaluated whether genetic tests with evidence of clinical and personal utility (i.e. APC and BRCA1/2 tests) are associated with higher satisfaction and a more positive perception of care experience than those with undefined utility (i.e. tests for thrombophilia). A cross-sectional survey was performed through telephone interviews to patients tested for deleterious variants in APC or BRCA1/2 genes, or for inherited thrombophilia (FV Leiden and/or FIIG20210A) during a 5-year period (2008-2012). Three aspects of patient experience were assessed: effective communication through pre- and post-test genetic counselling; collaboration between caregivers on the management of patient care; and impact of genetic testing on quality of life. Overall 237 patients had telephone interviews. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that patients tested for APC or BRCA1/2 variants were more likely to be satisfied with both pre- and post-test counselling than those tested for inherited thrombophilia (APC vs. thrombophilia, p = 0.039 and 0.005; BRCA1/2 vs. thrombophilia, p = 0.030 and <0.001). Patients tested for APC were more likely to report an improvement in quality of life than those for thrombophilia (OR = 2.97, 95%CI 1.14, 7.72; p = 0.025). A positive association was observed between patients who underwent BRCA1/2 testing, and self-perceived improvement in quality of life (OR = 1.41, 95%CI 0.74, 2.69; p = 0.294). Tests of undefined clinical and personal utility are associated with a lower degree of patient satisfaction with genetic counselling and no clear opinions on changes in quality of life compared with those with well-defined utility.

Anticipated health behaviour changes and perceived control in response to disclosure of genetic risk of breast and ovarian cancer: a quantitative survey study among women in the UK

BACKGROUND

Genetic risk assessment for breast cancer and ovarian cancer (BCOC) is expected to make major inroads into mainstream clinical practice. It is important to evaluate the potential impact on women ahead of its implementation in order to maximise health benefits, as predictive genetic testing without adequate support could lead to adverse psychological and behavioural responses to risk disclosure.

OBJECTIVE

To examine anticipated health behaviour changes and perceived control to disclosure of genetic risk for BCOC and establish demographic and person-specific correlates of adverse anticipated responses in a population-based sample of women.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional quantitative survey study carried out by the UK Office for National Statistics in January and March 2014.

SETTING

Face-to-face computer-assisted interviews conducted by trained researchers in participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

837 women randomly chosen from households across the UK identified from the Royal Mail's Postcode Address File.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Anticipated health behaviour change and perceived control to disclosure of BCOC risk.

RESULTS

In response to a genetic test result, most women (72%) indicated 'I would try harder to have a healthy lifestyle', and over half (55%) felt 'it would give me more control over my life'. These associations were independent of demographic factors or perceived risk of BCOC in Bonferroni-corrected multivariate analyses. However, a minority of women (14%) felt 'it isn't worth making lifestyle changes' and that 'I would feel less free to make choices in my life' (16%) in response to BCOC risk disclosure. The former belief was more likely to be held by women who were educated below university degree level (P<0.001) after adjusting for other demographic and person-specific correlates.

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate that women in the UK largely anticipate that they would engage in positive health behaviour changes in response to BCOC risk disclosure.

Genetics in palliative oncology: a missing agenda? A review of the literature and future directions

PURPOSE

In the palliative oncology setting, genetic assessment may not impact on the patient's management but can be of vital importance to their surviving relatives. Despite care of the family being central to the ethos of palliative care, little is known about how hereditary aspects of cancer are addressed in this setting. This review aims to examine current practices, identify practice barriers and determine the genetic information and support needs of patients, family members and health providers.

METHODS

Key databases were systematically searched to identify both quantitative and qualitative studies that addressed these aims. Data was extracted and coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included for review. Suboptimal genetic practices were identified, with lack of knowledge and poor confidence amongst providers reported as barriers in both qualitative and quantitative studies. Providers expressed concern about the emotional impact of initiating these discussions late in the disease trajectory; however, qualitative interviews amongst palliative patients suggested there may be emotional benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

All lines of evidence suggest that genetics is currently missing from the palliative agenda, signifying lost opportunities for mutation detection, genetic counselling and appropriate risk management for surviving relatives. There is an urgent need for interventions to improve provider knowledge and awareness of genetic referral pathways and for research into the genetic information and support needs of palliative care patients.

Psychosocial and behavioral impact of breast cancer risk assessed by testing for common risk variants: protocol of a prospective study

Background

The ‘common variant, common disease’ model predicts that a significant component of hereditary breast cancer unexplained by pathogenic variants in moderate or high-penetrance genes is due to the cumulative effect of common risk variants in DNA (polygenic risk). Assessing a woman’s breast cancer risk by testing for common risk variants can provide useful information for women who would otherwise receive uninformative results by traditional monogenic testing. Despite increasing support for the utility of common risk variants in hereditary breast cancer, research findings have not yet been integrated into clinical practice. Translational research is therefore critical to ensure results are effectively communicated, and that women do not experience undue adverse psychological outcomes.

Methods

In this prospective study, 400 women with a personal and/or high risk family history of breast cancer will be recruited from six familial cancer centers (FCCs) in Australia. Eligible women will be invited to attend a FCC and receive their personal polygenic risk result for breast cancer. Genetic health professionals participating in the study will receive training on the return of polygenic risk information and a training manual and visual aids will be developed to facilitate patient communication. Participants will complete up to three self-administered questionnaires over a 12-months period to assess the short-and long-term psychological and behavioral outcomes of receiving or not receiving their personal polygenic risk result.

Discussion

This is the world’s first study to assess the psychological and behavioral impact of offering polygenic risk information to women from families at high risk of breast cancer. Findings from this research will provide the basis for the development of a new service model to provide polygenic risk information in familial cancer clinics.

Trial registration

The study was retrospectively registered on 27th April 2017 with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Group (Registration no: ACTRN12617000594325; clinical trial URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372743).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3485-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Risk Perception and Psychological Distress in Genetic Counselling for Hereditary Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer

Oncological Genetic Counselling (CGO) allows the identification of a genetic component that increases the risk of developing a cancer. Individuals' psychological reactions are influenced by both the content of the received information and the subjective perception of their own risk of becoming ill or being a carrier of a genetic mutation. This study included 120 participants who underwent genetic counselling for breast and/or ovarian cancer. The aim of the study was to examine the relation between their cancer risk perception and the genetic risk during CGO before receiving genetic test results, considering the influence of some psychological variables, in particular distress, anxiety and depression. Participants completed the following tools during a psychological interview: a socio-demographic form, Cancer Risk Perception (CRP) and Genetic Risk Perception (GRP), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Distress Thermometer (DT). The data seem to confirm our hypothesis. Positive and significant correlations were found between the observed variables. Moreover, genetic risk perception determined an increase in depressive symptomatology and cancer risk perception led to an increase in anxious symptomatology, specifically in participants during cancer treatment. The present results suggest the importance of assessing genetic and cancer risk perception in individuals who undergo CGO, to identify those who are at risk of a decrease in psychological well-being and of developing greater psychological distress.

Ethical issues in genetic counseling

Genetics has made great progress in the past decades, and prenatal diagnosis, predictive genetic testing, and genetic counseling have drawn the limelight of public attention. Because the subject of genetic counseling is of crucial consequence for both the short and long term, its ethical aspects are paramount. The question is whether mankind is mature enough to use this extraordinary knowledge in the right way for the benefit of the society. In the center of ethical questions is the comprehensiveness of information provided to the couples or patients and counseling them about results and making informed educated decisions. In addition, it is crucial how sensitive personal information is treated and whether and how it should be made public.

Two novel sequence variants in MSH2 gene in a patient who underwent cancer genetic counseling for a very early-onset epithelial ovarian cancer

Background

Early-onset or hereditary ovarian cancer is mostly associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Mismatch repair genes sequence alteration frequently cause colorectal cancer, and, in less extent, other tumors, such as ovarian cancer. Subjects with personal and/or family history suggestive for hereditary cancer should be addressed to cancer genetic counseling, aimed to the identification, definition and management of hereditary cancer syndrome, by a multidisciplinary approach.

Case presentation

A woman with a very early onset epithelial ovarian cancer underwent to cancer genetic counseling and genetic testing. Pedigree analysis suggested a clinical diagnosis of Lynch II syndrome, according to the Amsterdam criteria. The MMRpro model showed a cumulative risk of mutation of 50.3 %, thus, genetic testing was offered to the patient. Two germ-line mutations have been identified in exon 11 of MSH2 gene: c.1706A > T (p.Glu569Val) and c.1711G > T (p.Glu571*). Both DNA alterations were novel mutations not yet described in literature. The first is a missense mutation that is to be considered an unclassified variant; the second is nonsense mutation that created a premature stop codon resulting in a truncated not functioning protein. Both genetic alterations were found in the patients’ father DNA.

Conclusions

The present report finds out two unpublished sequence alterations in exon 11 of the MSH2 gene, one on which can be considered causative of Lynch phenotype. Moreover, it stresses the importance of the multidisciplinary onco-genetic counselling in order to correctly frame the hereditary syndrome, suggest the right genetic test, and offer the most appropriate management of the cancer risk for the patients and her family members.

Quality of Life and Psychological State in Chinese Breast Cancer Patients Who Received BRCA1/2 Genetic Testing

Background

This study aims to understand the quality of life (QOL) and psychological state (PS) of Chinese breast cancer patients who received BRCA1/2 genetic testing; to examine the psychological changes between BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and non-carriers; and to further explore the psychological experience of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Methods

This study was combined with quantitative and qualitative designs. First, we performed a quantitative investigation using FACT-B (Chinese version) and Irritability, Depression and Anxiety scale (IDA) to assess the QOL and PS in breast cancer patients who received BRCA1/2 genetic testing. Then semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews among 13 mutation carriers were conducted in hospital.

Results

Results from the quantitative study showed QOL scores were relatively high and the IDA scores were relatively low among the patients, and there was no significant difference in the QOL or IDA scores between non-carriers and carriers. Based on the qualitative analysis, four main themes emerged: (1) Finding the reason for having breast cancer; (2) Negative emotions; (3) Behavioral changes; (4) Lack of information.

Conclusions

The present study showed that QOL and PS are good among the breast cancer patients who received genetic testing. Genetic testing itself does not cause long psychosocial effects. BRCA1/2 mutation carriers may have certain negative emotions at the first stage they knew the testing results and may initiate behavioral and lifestyle changes. The patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation desire knowledge with regard to genetic aspects in mainland China. Professional information and advice can be provided to relieve the patients’ negative emotions when they were informed of gene defect.

Psychosocial impact of prognostic genetic testing in the care of uveal melanoma patients: protocol of a controlled prospective clinical observational study

Background

Uveal melanoma patients with a poor prognosis can be detected through genetic analysis of the tumor, which has a very high sensitivity. A large number of patients with uveal melanoma decide to receive information about their individual risk and therefore routine prognostic genetic testing is being carried out on a growing number of patients. It is obvious that a positive prediction for recidivism in the future will emotionally burden the respective patients, but research on the psychosocial impact of this innovative method is lacking. The aim of the current study is therefore to investigate the psychosocial impact (psychological distress and quality of life) of prognostic genetic testing in patients with uveal melanoma.

Design and methods

This study is a non-randomized controlled prospective clinical observational trial. Subjects are patients with uveal melanoma, in whom genetic testing is possible. Patients who consent to genetic testing are allocated to the intervention group and patients who refuse genetic testing form the observational group. Both groups receive cancer therapy and psycho-oncological intervention when needed. The psychosocial impact of prognostic testing is investigated with the following variables: resilience, social support, fear of tumor progression, depression, general distress, cancer-specific and general health-related quality of life, attitude towards genetic testing, estimation of the perceived risk of metastasis, utilization and satisfaction with psycho-oncological crisis intervention, and sociodemographic data. Data are assessed preoperatively (at initial admission in the clinic) and postoperatively (at discharge from hospital after surgery, 6–12 weeks, 6 and 12 months after initial admission). Genetic test results are communicated 6–12 weeks after initial admission to the clinic.

Discussion

We created optimal conditions for investigation of the psychosocial impact of prognostic genetic testing. This study will provide information on the course of disease and psychosocial outcomes after prognostic genetic testing. We expect that empirical data from our study will give a scientific basis for medico-ethical considerations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2479-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.