A Survey of Patients’ Experiences with the Cancer Genetic Counseling Process: Recommendations for Cancer Genetics Programs

A personalized genomic results e-booklet, co-designed and pilot-tested by families

Objective

To develop and evaluate a personalizable genomic results e-booklet that helps families understand their genomic testing results and navigate available resources.

Methods

The need for the Genomics Results e-Booklet was identified by families, after which this tool was developed by a team of clinical researchers and three parent-advisors. We customized the genomic results e-booklet for 50 families participating in a genomic sequencing research study. We conducted an assessment using a 19-question survey and semi-structured interviews to elicit feedback and iteratively improve the tool.

Results

25 users provided feedback via questionnaires and seven respondents were interviewed. Genomic Results e-Booklet recipients responded favorably: 96% of participants stated that it helped them remember information shared during their results appointment, 80% said it had or would help them communicate their results with other healthcare providers, 68% felt that it helped to identify and guide their next steps, and 72% anticipated that the e-booklet would have future utility.

Conclusion

The Genomic Results e-Booklet is a patient and family-oriented resource that complements post-test genetic counselling.

Innovation

Compared to traditional laboratory reports and clinical letters, the Genomics Results e-Booklet is patient-conceived and patient-centered, and allows clinicians to efficiently personalize content and prioritize patient understanding and support.

Assessing the relationship between patient preferences for recontact after BRCA1 or BRCA2 genetic testing and their monitoring coping style in a Norwegian sample

Recontacting former patients regarding new genetic information is currently not standard care but might be implemented in the future. Little information is available on the implications of this practice from the point of view of former patients. The aim of this study was to investigate preferences for recontact when new genetic information becomes available among patients tested for BRCA pathogenic variants. We further wanted to investigate whether having a high or low information-seeking coping style (monitoring) impacts preferences. Preferences for recontact were assessed using a self-constructed questionnaire. The Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI) was used to measure monitoring coping style. The questionnaires were sent to 500 randomly selected patients who had previously been tested for BRCA pathogenic variants within the time frame 2001-2014 at one genetic clinic in Norway. We received 323 completed questionnaires. Most respondents wanted to be recontacted with advances in genetic medicine (81.1%) and to receive highly personalized updates. Genetic counselors/geneticists were believed to be most responsible for recontact. There was a significant relationship between being a high monitor and wanting recontact to learn about own cancer risk and receive ongoing support. Patients have a high interest in being recontacted. The findings indicated a tendency for high monitors to prefer more detailed and personalized information.

Awareness of genetic counseling and genetic testing for hereditary gynecologic cancers among Korean healthcare providers: A survey

We conducted a survey to evaluate the awareness of genetic counseling and testing for hereditary gynecologic cancers among Korean healthcare providers. We performed an on-the-spot survey using 29 questions on respondents' basic information, awareness of pre/post-test genetic counseling, genetic information management, and related social issues. We surveyed healthcare providers who attended the 2019 Hereditary Gynecologic Cancer Symposium organized by the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Of the 108 attendees, 85 (78.7%) participated in the survey. Among them, 45% (37/83) and 40% (33/83) did not have a separate clinic and had a dedicated team for genetic counseling in their institutions, respectively. Most respondents (60/76, 79%) recommended genetic testing for all women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. Many respondents simultaneously (20/85, 24%) or sequentially (45/85, 53%) tested for both pathogenic somatic and germline variants, whereas a few respondents (2/85, 2%) checked for only pathogenic somatic variants using tissue samples. Only 20% (17/85) of the respondents recommended genetic testing for all women with endometrial cancer; meanwhile, 68% (58/86) offered the test based on the results of the screening test or family history. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was recommended to unaffected women with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants by 69.4% of the respondents (59/85). Most respondents (73/85, 85.9%) needed a manual on bioethics law; a few required a clinical update of hereditary cancer (73/85, 85.9%). The awareness of genetic counseling and testing and the pattern of clinical practice for hereditary gynecologic cancers differ among institutions and regions in Korea. A discussion on these issues and the development of an integrated manual for healthcare providers are required.

The proportion of endometrial tumours associated with Lynch syndrome (PETALS): A prospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Lynch syndrome (LS) predisposes to endometrial cancer (EC), colorectal cancer, and other cancers through inherited pathogenic variants affecting mismatch-repair (MMR) genes. Diagnosing LS in women with EC can reduce subsequent cancer mortality through colonoscopic surveillance and aspirin chemoprevention; it also enables cascade testing of relatives. A growing consensus supports LS screening in EC; however, the expected proportion of test positives, and optimal testing strategy is uncertain. Previous studies from insurance-based healthcare systems were limited by narrow selection criteria, failure to apply reference standard tests consistently, and poor conversion to definitive testing. The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of LS and the diagnostic accuracy of LS testing strategies in an unselected EC population.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This was a prospective cross-sectional study carried out at a large United Kingdom gynaecological cancer centre between October 2015 and January 2017. Women diagnosed with EC or atypical hyperplasia (AH) were offered LS testing. Tumours underwent MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI), and targeted MLH1-methylation testing. Women <50 years, with strong family histories and/or indicative tumour molecular features, underwent MMR germline sequencing. Somatic MMR sequencing was performed when indicative molecular features were unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation. The main outcome measures were the prevalence of LS in an unselected EC population and the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and tumour testing strategies for risk stratifying women with EC for MMR germline sequencing. In total, 500 women participated in the study; only 2 (<1%) declined. Germline sequencing was indicated and conducted for 136 and 135 women, respectively. A total of 16/500 women (3.2%, 95% CI 1.8% to 5.1%) had LS, and 11 more (2.2%) had MMR variants of uncertain significance. Restricting testing to age <50 years, indicative family history (revised Bethesda guidelines or Amsterdam II criteria) or endometrioid histology alone would have missed 9/16 (56%), 8/13 (62%) or 9/13 (69%), and 5/16 (31%) cases of LS, respectively. In total 132/500 tumours were MMR deficient by IHC of which 83/132 (63%) had MLH1-hypermethylation, and 16/49 (33%) of the remaining patients had LS (16/132 with MMR deficiency, 12%). MMR-IHC with targeted MLH1-methylation testing was more discriminatory for LS than MSI with targeted methylation testing, with 100% versus 56.3% (16/16 versus 9/16) sensitivity (p = 0.016) and equal 97.5% (468/484) specificity; 64% MSI-H and 73% MMR deficient tumours unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation had somatic MMR mutations. The main limitation of the study was failure to conduct MMR germline sequencing for the whole study population, which means that the sensitivity and specificity of tumour triage strategies for LS detection may be overestimated, although the risk of LS in women with no clinical or tumour predictors is expected to be extremely low.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed that age, family history, and histology are imprecise clinical correlates of LS-EC. IHC outperformed MSI for tumour triage and reliably identified both germline and somatic MMR mutations. The 3.2% proportion of LS-EC is similar to colorectal cancer, supporting unselected screening of EC for LS.

Cost-Effectiveness of the Manchester Approach to Identifying Lynch Syndrome in Women with Endometrial Cancer

Lynch syndrome (LS) is a hereditary cancer syndrome responsible for 3% of all endometrial cancer and 5% in those aged under 70 years. It is unclear whether universal testing for LS in endometrial cancer patients would be cost-effective. The Manchester approach to identifying LS in endometrial cancer patients uses immunohistochemistry (IHC) to detect mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency, incorporates testing for MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, and incorporates genetic testing for pathogenic MMR variants. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Manchester approach on the basis of primary research data from clinical practice in Manchester. The Proportion of Endometrial Tumours Associated with Lynch Syndrome (PETALS) study informed estimates of diagnostic performances for a number of different strategies. A recent microcosting study was adapted and was used to estimate diagnostic costs. A Markov model was used to predict long-term costs and health outcomes (measured in quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) for individuals and their relatives. Bootstrapping and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were used to estimate the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness. The Manchester approach dominated other reflex testing strategies when considering diagnostic costs and Lynch syndrome cases identified. When considering long-term costs and QALYs the Manchester approach was the optimal strategy, costing £5459 per QALY gained (compared to thresholds of £20,000 to £30,000 per QALY commonly used in the National Health Service (NHS)). Cost-effectiveness is not an argument for restricting testing to younger patients or those with a strong family history. Universal testing for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer patients is expected to be cost-effective in the U.K. (NHS), and the Manchester approach is expected to be the optimal testing strategy.

Genetic Counseling Status and Perspectives Based on a 2018 Professional Survey in Korea

BACKGROUND

Genetic counseling (GC) provides many benefits, including the identification of patients appropriate for testing, patient education, and medical management. We evaluated the current status of and challenges faced by GC practitioners in Korean hospitals.

METHODS

An electronic survey was designed and conducted in 52 certified laboratory physicians belonging to the Korean Society of Laboratory Medicine, from August to September 2018. The questionnaires addressed three main categories of information: (1) current status of GC in hospitals; (2) essential qualifications of GC practitioners; and (3) challenges and perspectives for GC. Fisher's exact test was applied to analyze categorical data.

RESULTS

Among a total of 52 participants who initially responded, 12 (23.1%) were performing GC either by direct or indirect care. GC clinics were opened regularly for one (33.3%) or more than three sessions (25.0%) per week; most respondents spent more time for pre-visit activities than in-person visits, both for a initial visit patient and for a follow-up visit patient. All laboratory physicians provided genetic information to their patients. Most recommended family genetic testing when indicated (91.7%), discussed disease management (75.0%), and/or ordered additional genetic testing (58.3%), and some referred patients to other specialists (8.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both patients and laboratory physicians concede the advantage of GC performed by clinical geneticists; however, the practice of GC involves several challenges and raises some concerns. The cost and support required to implement GC need to be addressed in order to provide qualified GC in Korea.

Genetic counselling and personalised risk assessment in the Australian pancreatic cancer screening program

Background

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is an aggressive disease with a dismal 5-year survival rate. Surveillance of high-risk individuals is hoped to improve survival outcomes by detection of precursor lesions or early-stage malignancy.

Methods

Since 2011, a national high-risk cohort recruited through St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, has undergone prospective PC screening incorporating annual endoscopic ultrasound, formal genetic counselling and mutation analysis as appropriate. PancPRO, a Bayesian PC risk assessment model, was used to estimate 5-year and lifetime PC risks for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) participants and this was compared to their perceived chance of pancreatic and other cancers. Genetic counselling guidelines were developed to improve consistency. Follow-up questionnaires were used to assess the role of genetic counselling and testing.

Results

We describe the Australian PC screening program design and recruitment strategy and the results of the first 102 individuals who have completed at least one-year of follow-up. Seventy-nine participants met the FPC criteria (≥ two first-degree relatives affected), 22 individuals had both a BRCA2 pathogenic variant and a close relative with PC and one had a clinical diagnosis of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Participants reported a high perceived chance of developing PC regardless of their genetic testing status. PancPRO reported FPC participants’ mean 5-year and lifetime PC risks as 1.81% (range 0.2–3.2%) and 10.17% (range 2.4–14.4%), respectively. Participants’ perceived PC chance did not correlate with their PancPRO 5-year (r = − 0.17, p = 0.128) and lifetime PC risks (r = 0.19, p = 0.091). Two-thirds felt that current genetic testing would help them, and 91% of tested participants were glad to have undergone genetic testing. Overall, 79% of participants found genetic counselling to be helpful, and 88% reported they would recommend counselling to their relatives.

Conclusions

Participants reported multiple benefits of genetic counselling and testing but continue to seek greater clarification about their individual PC risk. Extension of PancPRO is required to enable personalised PC risk assessment for all high-risk sub-groups. More detailed discussion of PC risk for BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers, providing a written summary in all cases and a plan for genetics review were identified as areas for improvement.

Recontacting or not recontacting? A survey of current practices in clinical genetics centres in Europe

Advances in genomic medicine are improving diagnosis and treatment of some health conditions, and the question of whether former patients should be recontacted is therefore timely. The issue of recontacting is becoming more important with increased integration of genomics in 'mainstream' medicine. Empirical evidence is needed to advance the discussion over whether and how recontacting should be implemented. We administered a web-based survey to genetic services in European countries to collect information about existing infrastructures and practices relevant to recontacting patients. The majority of the centres stated they had recontacted patients to update them about new significant information; however, there were no standardised practices or systems in place. There was also a multiplicity of understandings of the term 'recontacting', which respondents conflated with routine follow-up programmes, or even with post-test counselling. Participants thought that recontacting systems should be implemented to provide the best service to the patients and families. Nevertheless, many barriers to implementation were mentioned. These included: lack of resources and infrastructure, concerns about potential negative psychological consequences of recontacting, unclear operational definitions of recontacting, policies that prevent healthcare professionals from recontacting, and difficulties in locating patients after their last contact. These barriers are also intensified by the highly variable development (and establishment) of the specialties of medical genetics and genetic counselling across different European countries. Future recommendations about recontacting need to consider these barriers. It is also important to reach an 'operational definition' that can be useful in different countries.

Recontacting in light of new genetic diagnostic techniques for patients with intellectual disability: Feasibility and parental perspectives

A higher diagnostic yield from new diagnostic techniques makes re-evaluation in patients with intellectual disability without a causal diagnosis valuable, and is currently only performed after new referral. Active recontacting might serve a larger group of patients. We aimed to evaluate parental perspectives regarding recontacting and its feasibility in clinical genetic practice. A recontacting pilot was performed in two cohorts of children with intellectual disability. In cohort A, parents were recontacted by phone and in cohort B by letter, to invite them for a re-evaluation due to the new technologies (array CGH and exome sequencing, respectively). Parental opinions, preferences and experiences with recontacting were assessed by a self-administered questionnaire, and the feasibility of this pilot was evaluated. 47 of 114 questionnaires were returned. In total, 87% of the parents believed that all parents should be recontacted in light of new insights, 17% experienced an (positive or negative) emotional reaction. In cohort A, approached by phone, 36% made a new appointment for re-evaluation, and in cohort B, approached by letter, 4% did. Most parents have positive opinions on recontacting. Recontacting might evoke emotional responses that may need attention. Recontacting is feasible but time-consuming and a large additional responsibility for clinical geneticists.

Recontacting in clinical practice: an investigation of the views of healthcare professionals and clinical scientists in the United Kingdom

This article explores the views and experiences of healthcare professionals and clinical scientists in genetics about the existence of a duty and/or responsibility to recontact former patients when the genetic information relevant to their health, or that of family members, changes in a potentially important manner. It is based on N=30 semi-structured interviews guided by vignettes of recontacting scenarios. The sample included healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom from different medical specialties (clinical genetics, other 'mainstream' specialties now offering genetic testing), and scientists from regional genetics laboratories. While viewing recontacting as desirable under certain circumstances, most respondents expressed concerns about its feasibility within the current constraints of the National Health Service (NHS). The main barriers identified were insufficient resources (time, staff, and suitable IT infrastructures) and lack of clarity about role boundaries and responsibilities. All of these are further complicated by genetic testing being increasingly offered by mainstream specialties. Reaching a consensus about roles and responsibilities of clinical specialties with regard to recontacting former patients in the light of evolving genetic information, and about what resources and infrastructures would be needed, was generally seen as a pre-requisite to developing guidelines about recontact.

Recontact in clinical practice: a survey of clinical genetics services in the United Kingdom

PURPOSE

To ascertain whether and how recontacting occurs in the United Kingdom.

METHOD

A Web-based survey was administered online between October 2014 and July 2015. A link to the survey was circulated via an e-mail invitation to the clinical leads of the United Kingdom's 23 clinical genetics services, with follow-up with senior clinical genetics staff.

RESULTS

The majority of UK services reported that they recontact patients and their family members. However, recontacting generally occurs in an ad hoc fashion when an unplanned event causes clinicians to review a file (a "trigger"). There are no standardized recontacting practices in the United Kingdom. More than half of the services were unsure whether formalized recontacting systems should be implemented. Some suggested greater patient involvement in the process of recontacting.

CONCLUSION

This research suggests that a thorough evaluation of the efficacy and sustainability of potential recontacting systems within the National Health Service would be necessary before deciding whether and how to implement such a service or to create guidelines on best-practice models.Genet Med 18 9, 876-881.

Concerns about cancer risk and experiences with genetic testing in a diverse population of patients with breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate preferences for and experiences with genetic testing in a diverse cohort of patients with breast cancer identified through population-based registries, with attention to differences by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

We surveyed women diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer from 2005 to 2007, as reported to the SEER registries of metropolitan Los Angeles and Detroit, about experiences with hereditary risk evaluation. Multivariable models evaluated correlates of a strong desire for genetic testing, unmet need for discussion with a health care professional, and receipt of testing.

RESULTS

Among 1,536 patients who completed the survey, 35% expressed strong desire for genetic testing, 28% reported discussing testing with a health care professional, and 19% reported test receipt. Strong desire for testing was more common in younger women, Latinas, and those with family history. Minority patients were significantly more likely to have unmet need for discussion (failure to discuss genetic testing with a health professional when they had a strong desire for testing): odds ratios of 1.68, 2.44, and 7.39 for blacks, English-speaking Latinas, and Spanish-speaking Latinas compared with whites, respectively. Worry in the long-term survivorship period was higher among those with unmet need for discussion (48.7% v 24.9%; P <.001). Patients who received genetic testing were younger, less likely to be black, and more likely to have a family cancer history.

CONCLUSION

Many patients, especially minorities, express a strong desire for genetic testing and may benefit from discussion to clarify risks. Clinicians should discuss genetic risk even with patients they perceive to be at low risk, as this may reduce worry.

Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

With rapid advances in genetic technologies, new genetic information becomes available much faster today than just a few years ago. This has raised questions about whether clinicians have a duty to recontact eligible patients when new genetic information becomes available and, if such duties exist, how they might be implemented in practice.

METHODS

We report the results of a systematic literature search on the ethical, legal, social (including psychological), and practical issues involved in recontacting former patients who received genetic services. We identified 1,428 articles, of which 61 are covered in this review.

RESULTS

The empirical evidence available indicates that most but not all patients value being recontacted. A minority of (older) articles conclude that recontacting should be a legal duty. Most authors consider recontacting to be ethically desirable but practically unfeasible. Various solutions to overcome these practical barriers have been proposed, involving efforts of laboratories, clinicians, and patients.

CONCLUSION

To advance the discussion on implementing recontacting in clinical genetics, we suggest focusing on the question of in what situations recontacting might be regarded as good standard of care. To this end, reaching a professional consensus, obtaining more extensive empirical evidence, and developing professional guidelines are important.

Communicating cancer risk within an African context: experiences, disclosure patterns and uptake rates following genetic testing for Lynch syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Data pertaining to Lynch syndrome within a developing country are sparse. This study explored the emotional reaction to a mutation-positive test result among a group of individuals from South Africa. As genetic information is not only limited to the individual but extends to the biological family, communication patterns and uptake of testing among at-risk family members was also investigated.

METHODS

Eighty individuals participated in this qualitative interview study.

RESULTS

Eight emotional reactions were observed, of which two were of particular concern: (1) secrecy due to disbelief and (2) interpretation of a mutation-positive result as a cancer diagnosis. Disclosure rates of personal genetic test results were high to family members, but low to general healthcare providers. Disclosing the test result was not always followed by a discussion of implications of the genetic information or availability of predictive testing for at-risk family members. The uptake rate of predictive testing among the participants' siblings and children was 97% and 73.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of concerning emotional reactions following the delivery of a genetic test result and insight into disclosure patterns, especially the information that is not communicated, will prove beneficial in improving the effectiveness of counselling and management in Lynch syndrome families.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Implementation of these findings into the PT programme will have a positive effect on the genetic counseling process.

Effects of a pre-visit educational website on information recall and needs fulfilment in breast cancer genetic counselling, a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Pre-visit education which helps counselees to prepare for their first visit for breast cancer genetic counseling might enhance information recall and needs fulfilment. This study assessed the effects of a pre-visit website with tailored information and question prompt sheet (QPS), named E-info gene^ca.

Methods

A total of 197 counselees were randomized to receive usual care (UC) or UC plus E-info gene^ca. All counselees completed a pre- and post-visit questionnaire and visits were videotaped. We studied effects on counselees' information recall, knowledge about breast cancer and heredity, fulfillment of needs, risk perception alignment, anxiety and perceived personal control, using multilevel regression analyses.

Results

Intent-to-treat analysis showed that counselees in the intervention group (n = 103) had higher levels of recall of information from the consultation (β = .32; confidence interval (CI): .04 to .60; P = .02; d = .17) and post-visit knowledge of breast cancer and heredity (β = .30; CI: .03 to .57; P = .03) than counselees in the UC group (n = 94). Also, intervention group counselees reported better fulfilment of information needs (β = .31; CI: .03 to .60; P = .03). The effects of the intervention were strongest for those counselees who did not receive an indication for DNA testing. Their recall scores showed a larger increase (β = .95; CI: .32 to 1.59; P = .003; d = .30) and their anxiety levels dropped more in the intervention compared to the UC group (β = -.60; CI: -1.12 to -.09; P = .02). No intervention effects were found after the first visit on risk perception alignment or perceived personal control.

Conclusions

This study shows that pre-counseling education, using tailored information technology, leads to more effective first visits for breast cancer genetic counseling, in particular for counselees who received no indication for DNA testing and, therefore, had no indication for a second visit. Future study should focus on the effects of a pre-visit website on the outcomes after a complete series of visits.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register ISRCTN82643064.

A pre-visit website with question prompt sheet for counselees facilitates communication in the first consultation for breast cancer genetic counseling: findings from a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The initial breast cancer genetic counseling visit is mainly educational, with large amounts of relatively standard information and little counselee participation. Counselors might provide more counselee-specific information if counselees would participate more. A pre-visit website providing computer-tailored information and a question prompt sheet (QPS) might help counselees to pursue a more active role.

METHODS

Counselees were randomized to receive usual care (UC) or UC plus the pre-visit website. The QPS questions were sent to the counselor before the visit. All counselees completed a baseline questionnaire, and visits were videotaped.

RESULTS

Intervention-group counselees (n = 102) did not ask more questions than UC-group counselees (n = 90). However, counselees in the intervention group more often shared their agenda (B = 10.37; confidence interval (CI) 2.68-18.06; P = 0.01), directed the communication (B = 0.41; CI 0.28-0.53; P = 0.01), and paraphrased the counselors' words (B = 5.18; CI 0.43-9.92; P = 0.03). Counselors introduced and answered the QPS questions. As a result, they provided more information about the topics of these questions, and the information provided was more specific to whether there was an indication for DNA testing.

CONCLUSION

A pre-visit website with QPS helped counselees to communicate more assertively. As a result, the information provided was more counselee specific, without affecting the visit duration.

Attitudes toward direct-to-consumer advertisements and online genetic testing among high-risk women participating in a hereditary cancer clinic

Genetic testing for the breast cancer genes 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) has helped women determine their risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. As interest in genetic testing has grown, companies have created strategies to disseminate information about testing, including direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) and online genetic testing. This study examined attitudes toward DTCA and online testing for BRCA among 84 women at a high-risk clinic as well as additional factors that may be associated with these attitudes, such as personal and familial cancer history, cancer worry and risk perception, and history with genetic testing/counseling. Results showed that the majority of the women held favorable attitudes toward DTCA for BRCA testing but did not support online testing. Factors such as familial ovarian cancer, cancer worry, and satisfaction with genetic counseling/testing were associated with positive attitudes toward DTCA, whereas personal breast cancer history was related to negative attitudes. The findings suggest that women may view DTCA as informational but rely on physicians for help in their decision to undergo testing, and also suggest that cancer history may affect women's acceptance of DTCA and genetic testing.

"For all my family's sake, I should go and find out": an Australian report on genetic counseling and testing uptake in individuals at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer

CONTEXT

Despite proven benefits, the uptake of genetic counseling and testing by at-risk family members of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers remains low.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine at-risk individuals' reported reasons for and against familial cancer clinic (FCC) attendance and genetic testing.

METHODS

Thirty-nine telephone interviews were conducted with relatives of high-risk mutation carriers, 23% (n = 9) of whom had not previously attended an FCC. Interview responses were analyzed using the frameworks of Miles and Huberman.

RESULTS

The reasons most commonly reported for FCC attendance were for clarification of risk status and to gain access to testing. While disinterest in testing was one reason for FCC nonattendance, several individuals were unaware of their risk (n = 3) or their eligibility to attend an FCC (n = 2), despite being notified of their risk status through their participation in a large-scale research project. Individuals' reasons for undergoing testing were in line with that reported elsewhere; however, concerns about discrimination and insurance were not reported in nontestees.

CONCLUSIONS

Current guidelines regarding notifying individuals discovered to be at increased risk in a research, rather than clinical setting, take a largely nondirective approach. However, this study demonstrates that individuals who receive a single letter notifying them of their risk may not understand/value the information they receive.

Assessment of clinical practices among cancer genetic counselors

Various models of cancer genetics service delivery have been published, and practice guidelines were set forth by the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) in 2004. While the demand for services has increased, there has not been a comprehensive study of current practice models. An online survey of the NSGC Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group was conducted to study current methods of providing clinical cancer genetics services. Respondents were asked to quantify patient volume, support staff availability, and physician involvement in cases. Two case examples were used to further describe current practices including the number of genetic counseling tasks performed, time spent in these tasks, and number of in-person visits versus phone encounters. Although published cancer genetic counseling guidelines advise a 3-visit model (initial consult, sample draw, and result disclosure), 29.3% of respondents have adopted a 1-visit model, where the sample is drawn at the first visit and phone disclosure replaces the third visit. The content of the initial consult does not vary significantly, and is consistent with the NSGC practice guidelines. Furthermore, 56% report spending >15 min on case preparation, and 27 respondents self-reported redundancy in tasks such as documentation. It appears that a proportion of genetic counselors are following a new model of service delivery. However, insufficient documentation and case preparation are apparent, and many respondents reported lack of support staff as a barrier to efficient patient care. Factors contributing to the variability in current practice, and how they affect efficiency, require further study.

"The bigger the network the bigger the bowl of cherries...": exploring the acceptability of, and preferences for, an ongoing support network for known BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers

There is increasing evidence to suggest that the ongoing information and support needs of BRCA gene mutation carriers are not being met. This qualitative study investigated preferences for an on-going support network for mutation carriers in Wales, UK. Seventeen female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers participated in focus groups which explored their current and on-going information and psychological support needs. The interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. The results reflected a diversity of experiences and support needs. The majority of participants felt they and their families would benefit from an on-going 'support network' which should incorporate information-provision alongside elements of a traditional support group alongside, internet-based support such as web-based chat forums, matching schemes and professionally led workshops. Some degree of professional input into any such initiative was believed to be important. This study has informed the development of an appropriate support network based on a hub and spoke model to help carriers and their families adapt to living and coping with their genetic risk.

Consumer contribution to the delivery of genetic health services

Clinical genetics services have been the focus of evaluation and guidelines since the 1970s. In this study we used consumer satisfaction as the evaluative measure with the aim being to seek feedback from consumers of a genetics service to inform quality measures for client-centered genetic services. In the first phase of the study issues were identified by consumers and health professionals around delivering genetics services and the priorities ranked into five themes: expectations, information, respect, privacy and logistics. These themes then formed the basis of a questionnaire that was distributed to consumers of a genetics service in Victoria, Australia. Three hundred ninety-seven out of 821 questionnaires were completed (49.8% response rate). More than 85% of consumers were satisfied in the theme of expectations, with the only issue being waiting times for genetic test results (68.6% satisfied). Over 83% of consumers were satisfied with the information received from the genetics service. The matter of interruptions during appointments was the only area in the theme of respect that rated less than 80% satisfactory (79.1%). In relation to privacy, consumers rated over 95% satisfaction. Logistics was the theme where satisfaction was lowest with ratings of less than 75% for issues such as availability of public transport to the clinic, parking and wheelchair access. Consumer satisfaction was related to the information received before and after consultations and also to the attitudes and behaviors of health professionals. These findings have implications for genetics services both in Australia and internationally and recommendations from the findings are outlined.

Attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer risk after genetic counseling and decision support: a qualitative comparison between hereditary cancer types

This study aimed to qualitatively assess individuals' attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer risk after genetic counseling and decision support. As part of a larger study, 78 women considering genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) risk and 22 individuals considering genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) completed an open-ended table of their perceived pros and cons of genetic testing. The most frequently reported pros were "to help manage my risk of developing cancer," "to help my family," and "to know my cancer risk." With regards to risk management, the HBOC group perceived genetic testing as most helpful in informing their general risk management practices, while the HN-PCC group focused on the potential to clarify their need for bowel cancer screening, suggesting that patients' perceptions of the benefits of genetic testing may differ across cancer syndromes. Individuals in both groups expressed concern about the potential psychological impact of genetic testing. We also found that some affected individuals may not fully comprehend the meaning of their potential test results. Eliciting patients' perceived pros and cons during genetic counseling is likely to be a valuable tool for improving patient care. This data also provides an improved evidence base for the development of patient education tools.

Managing genetic discrimination: strategies used by individuals found to have the Huntington disease mutation

The introduction of predictive testing for Huntington disease (HD) over 20 years ago has led to the advent of a new group of individuals found to have the HD mutation that are currently asymptomatic, yet destined in all likelihood to become affected at some point in the future. Genetic discrimination, a social risk associated with predictive testing, is the differential treatment of individuals based on genotypic difference rather than physical characteristics. While evidence for genetic discrimination exists, little is known about how individuals found to have the HD mutation cope with the potential for or experiences of genetic discrimination. The purpose of this study was to explore how individuals found to have the HD mutation manage the risk and experience of genetic discrimination. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with 37 individuals who were found to have the HD mutation and analysed using grounded theory methods. The findings suggest four main strategies: "keeping low", minimizing, pre-empting and confronting genetic discrimination. Strategies varied depending on individuals' level of engagement with genetic discrimination and the nature of the experience (actual experience of genetic discrimination or concern for its potential). This exploratory framework may explain the variation in approaches and reactions to genetic discrimination among individuals living with an increased risk for HD and may offer insight for persons at risk for other late-onset genetic diseases to cope with genetic discrimination.