Patterns of photoprotection following CDKN2A/p16 genetic test reporting and counseling

Melanoma literacy among the general population of three western US states

Melanoma is a significant cause of cancer death, despite being detectable without specialized or invasive technologies. Understanding barriers to preventive behaviors such as skin self-examination (SSE) could help to define interventions for increasing the frequency of early detection. To determine melanoma knowledge and beliefs across three high-incidence US states, 15,000 surveys were sent to a population-representative sample. We aimed to assess (1) melanoma literacy (i.e., knowledge about melanoma risks, attitudes, and preventive behaviors) and (2) self-reported SSE and its association with melanoma literacy, self-efficacy, and belief in the benefits of SSE. Of 2326 respondents, only 21.2% provided responses indicating high knowledge of melanoma, and 62.8% reported performing an SSE at any time in their lives. Only 38.3% and 7.3% reported being "fairly" or "very" confident about doing SSE, respectively. SSE performance among respondents was most strongly associated with higher melanoma knowledge, higher self-efficacy, and personal history of melanoma. Melanoma literacy among survey respondents was modest, with greater literacy associated with a higher likelihood of reported preventive behavior. This assessment establishes a baseline and provides guidance for public health campaigns designed to increase prevention and early detection of this lethal cancer.

Considerations for Germline Testing in Melanoma: Updates in Behavioral Change and Pancreatic Surveillance for Carriers of CDKN2A Pathogenic Variants

The largest proportion of hereditary melanoma cases are due to pathogenic variants (PVs) in the CDKN2A/p16 gene, which account for 20%-40% of familial melanomas and confer up to a 30%-70% lifetime risk for melanoma in individuals with these variants. In addition, PVs in the CDKN2A gene also increase risk for pancreatic cancer (~5-24% lifetime risk). Individuals with PVs in the CDKN2A gene also tend to have an earlier onset of cancer. Despite these known risks, uptake of germline testing has been limited in the past, largely due to perceptions of limited benefit for patients. Prevention recommendations have been developed for individuals with CDKN2A PVs as well the providers who care for them. On the patient level, behavioral modifications regarding melanoma prevention such as wearing sunscreen, limiting prolonged sun exposure and practicing general sun safety can help reduce risks. Germline testing can provide motivation for some individuals to adhere to these lifestyle changes. On the provider level, pancreatic cancer surveillance for individuals with CDKN2A PVs has been increasingly endorsed by expert consensus, although the efficacy of these surveillance methods remains under study. This review summarizes the updated surveillance guidelines for individuals with CDKN2A PVs and explores the impact of genetic counseling and testing in influencing behavioral changes in these individuals.

A Systematic Review on the Impact of Genetic Testing for Familial Melanoma I: Primary and Secondary Preventative Behaviours

BACKGROUND

Increasing availability of panel testing for known high-penetrance familial melanoma genes has made it possible to improve risk awareness in those at greatest risk. Prior to wider implementation, the role of genetic testing in preventing melanoma, through influencing primary and secondary preventative behaviours, requires clarification.

METHODS

Database searches of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were conducted for studies describing preventative behaviour outcomes in response to genetic testing for melanoma risk. Publications describing original research of any study type were screened for eligibility.

RESULTS

Eighteen publications describing 11 unique studies were reviewed. Outcomes assessed are based on health behaviour recommendations for those at increased risk: adherence to sun-protective behaviour (SPB); clinical skin examinations (CSE); skin self-examinations (SSE); and family discussion of risk. Overall, modest increases in adherence to primary prevention strategies of SPB were observed following genetic testing. Importantly, there were no net decreases in SPB found amongst non-carriers. For secondary preventative behaviour outcomes, including CSE and SSE, increases in post-test intentions and long-term adherence were reported across several subgroups in approximately half of the studies. While this increase reached significance in mutation carriers in some studies, one study reported a significant decline in annual CSE adherence of non-mutation carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence reviewed suggests that genetic testing has a modestly positive impact on preventative behaviour in high-risk individuals. Furthermore, improvements are observed regardless of mutation carrier status, although greater adherence is found in carriers. While additional studies of more diverse cohorts would be needed to inform clinical recommendations, the findings are encouraging and suggest that genetic testing for melanoma has a positive impact on preventative behaviours.

Priority of Risk (But Not Perceived Magnitude of Risk) Predicts Improved Sun-Protection Behavior Following Genetic Counseling for Familial Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Understanding multiple components of risk perceptions is important because perceived risk predicts engagement in prevention behaviors.

PURPOSE

To examine how multiple components of risk perceptions (perceived magnitude of and worry about risk, prioritization of the management of one's risk) changed following genetic counseling with or without test reporting, and to examine which of these components prospectively predicted improvements in sun-protection behavior 1 year later.

METHODS

A prospective, nonrandomized study design was used. Participants were 114 unaffected members of melanoma-prone families who (i) underwent genetic testing for a CDKN2A/p16 mutation (n = 69) or (ii) were at comparably elevated risk based on family history and underwent genetic counseling but not testing (no-test controls, n = 45). Participants reported risk perception components and sun-protection behavior at baseline, immediately following counseling, and 1 month and 1 year after counseling.

RESULTS

Factor analysis indicated three risk components. Carriers reported increased perceived magnitude and priority of risk, but not cancer worry. No-test controls showed no changes in any risk perception. Among noncarriers, priority of risk remained high at all assessments, whereas magnitude of risk and cancer worry decreased. Of the three risk components, greater priority of risk uniquely predicted improved self-reported sun protection 1 year post-counseling.

CONCLUSIONS

Priority of risk (i) seems to be a component of risk perceptions distinguishable from magnitude of risk and cancer worry, (ii) may be an important predictor of daily prevention behavior, and (iii) remained elevated 1 year following genetic counseling only for participants who received a positive melanoma genetic test result.

Parent and child perspectives on perceived barriers to child sun protection and their association with sun protection strategies among children of melanoma survivors

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Children with an elevated familial risk for melanoma inconsistently implement sun protection behaviors that could mitigate their melanoma risk. Little is known about perceived barriers to child sun protection among this at-risk group and their parents, and the extent to which perceived barriers are associated with child sun protection. The goal of this study was to examine, among children with a family history of melanoma, the frequency with which children and their parents reported barriers to child sun protection and the extent to which barriers were associated with reported use of sun protection among children.

METHODS

Children with a family history of melanoma and their parents completed questionnaires assessing perceived barriers and reported child use of sun protection.

RESULTS

Common barriers to child sun protection included being bothered by implementing the behavior or forgetting. A greater number of perceived barriers were associated with less frequent child use of sunscreen, long-sleeved shirts, long pants, and shade.

CONCLUSIONS

Children at elevated risk for melanoma due to a family history of the disease and their parents perceive multiple barriers to sun protection that are associated with children's use of these melanoma preventive behaviors. Sun protection interventions for this at-risk population could provide families with specific strategies to address common barriers to implementing child sun protection.

Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Advances in genomewide association studies have made possible the return of genetic risk results for complex diseases. Two concerns about these results are (a) negative psychological consequences and (b) viewing probabilistic results as deterministic, leading to misinterpretation and inappropriate decisions. The present study evaluates these concerns through a meta-analytic review of existing literature.

METHOD

Seventeen genetic testing studies of complex disease, including 1,171 participants and reporting 195 effects, 104 of which were unadjusted for covariates, were meta-analyzed under a random effects model. Diseases included Alzheimer's, cardiovascular and coronary heart disease, lung cancer, melanoma, thrombophilia, and type II diabetes. Six domains of behavioral-psychological reactions were examined.

RESULTS

Carriers showed significantly increased self-reported behavior change compared to noncarriers when assessed 6 months or later after results return (Hedges's g = .36, p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Return of genetic testing results for complex disease does not strongly impact self-reported negative behavior or psychological function of at-risk individuals. Return of results does appear to moderately increase self-reported healthy behavior in carriers, although research on objectively observed behavior change is needed. This is a growing area of research, with preliminary results suggesting potential positive implications of genetic testing for complex disease on behavior change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Genetic test reporting of CDKN2A provides informational and motivational benefits for managing melanoma risk

A CDKN2A/p16 mutation confers 28%-67% lifetime melanoma risk, a risk that may be moderated by ultraviolet radiation exposure. The aim of this study was to test whether melanoma genetic counseling and test disclosure conferred unique informational, motivational, or emotional benefits compared to family history-based counseling. Participants included were 114 unaffected members of melanoma-prone families, ages 16-69, 51.8% men, 65.8% with minor children or grandchildren. Carriers (n = 28) and noncarriers (n = 41) from families with a CDKN2A mutation were compared to no-test controls (n = 45) from melanoma-prone families without an identifiable CDKN2A mutation. All participants received equivalent counseling about melanoma risk and management; only CDKN2A participants received genetic test results. Using newly developed inventories, participants rated perceived costs and benefits for managing their own and their children's or grandchildren's melanoma risk 1 month and 1 year after counseling. Propensity scores controlled for baseline family differences. Compared to no-test controls, participants who received test results (carriers and noncarriers) reported feeling significantly more informed and prepared to manage their risk, and carriers reported greater motivation to reduce sun exposure. All groups reported low negative emotions about melanoma risk. Parents reported high levels of preparedness to manage children's risk regardless of group. Carrier parents reported greater (but moderate) worry about their children's risk than no-test control parents. Women, older, and more educated respondents reported greater informational and motivational benefits regardless of group. Genetic test results were perceived as more informative and motivating for personal sun protection efforts than equivalent counseling based on family history alone.

Factors influencing and modifying the decision to pursue genetic testing for skin cancer risk

BACKGROUND

Across cancers, the decision to pursue genetic testing is influenced more by subjective than objective factors. However, skin cancer, which is more prevalent, visual, and multifactorial than many other malignancies, may offer different motivations for pursuing such testing.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine factors influencing the decision to receive genetic testing for skin cancer risk. A secondary objective was to assess the impact of priming with health questions on the decision to receive testing.

METHODS

We distributed anonymous online surveys through ResearchMatch.org to assess participant health, demographics, motivations, and interest in pursuing genetic testing for skin cancer risk. Two surveys with identical questions but different question ordering were used to assess the secondary objective.

RESULTS

We received 3783 responses (64% response rate), and 85.8% desired testing. Subjective factors, including curiosity, perceptions of skin cancer, and anxiety, were the most statistically significant determinants of the decision to pursue testing (P < .001), followed by history of sun exposure (odds ratio 1.85, P < .01) and history of skin cancer (odds ratio 0.5, P = .01). Age and family history of skin cancer did not influence this decision. Participants increasingly chose testing if first queried about health behaviors (P < .0001).

LIMITATIONS

The decision to pursue hypothetical testing may differ from in-clinic decision-making. Self-selected, online participants may differ from the general population. Surveys may be subject to response bias.

CONCLUSION

The decision to pursue genetic testing for skin cancer is primarily determined by subjective factors, such as anxiety and curiosity. Health factors, including skin cancer history, also influenced decision-making. Priming with consideration of objective health factors can increase the desire to pursue testing.

A systematic review of interventions to improve adherence to melanoma preventive behaviors for individuals at elevated risk

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness of behavioral interventions for melanoma prevention targeted to individuals at elevated risk due to personal and/or family history.

METHODS

Through literature searches in 5 search databases (through July 2014), 20 articles describing 14 unique interventions focused on melanoma prevention among individuals at elevated risk for the disease were identified. Interventions targeting only patients undergoing active treatment for melanoma were excluded.

RESULTS

The average study quality was moderate. The majority of interventions (6 out of 9, 66% of studies) led to improvements in one or more photoprotective behaviors, particularly for improvements in use of protective clothing (3 out of 5, 60% of studies), and frequency and/or thoroughness of skin self-examinations (9 out of 12, 75%). Fewer interventions (5 out of 14, 36%) targeted uptake of total body skin examinations (60% led to improvements). Also, fewer interventions targeted all three preventive behaviors (5 out of 14, 36%).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that future interventions should aim to improve adherence across multiple preventive behaviors, over a longer time period (past 8months post-intervention), and target high-risk children. Studies should include adequate sample sizes to investigate moderators and mediators of intervention effectiveness. Interventions may be strengthened by new techniques, such as incorporating family members (e.g., to improve thoroughness of skin self-examinations) and eHealth technology.

Discussion of photoprotection, screening, and risk behaviors with children and grandchildren after melanoma genetic testing

The purpose of the current study was to examine changes in frequency of discussion about melanoma preventive behaviors among adults who received melanoma genetic test reporting and counseling and their children and grandchildren, correspondence of frequency of discussion with intentions, and content of discussions. Participants received CDKN2A/p16 testing and counseling (N = 24, 46 % p16-positive). Discussions about preventive behaviors were assessed before testing and 1 and 6 months post-testing. Intentions to discuss preventive behaviors and perceived preparedness to discuss risk were assessed post-testing. Open-ended questions assessed content of reported discussions. Discussion of preventive behaviors declined following test reporting, with more rapid decline reported by noncarriers. There was a large gap between the percentage of participants who intended to discuss preventive behaviors and who then reported discussions 1 and 6 months after counseling. Participants felt prepared to discuss melanoma risk but also suggested resources to facilitate discussions. Genetic test reporting and counseling alone did not sustain discussions about preventive behaviors for a hereditary cancer with children and grandchildren. The gap between intentions to have discussions and reported discussions has implications for augmentation of counseling to support at-risk families' discussions about preventive behaviors.

The digital age of melanoma management: detection and diagnostics

New technologies are increasingly impacting the way melanoma is detected and diagnosed. Devices, software and diagnostics abound, ranging from smartphone applications that purport to predict which lesions are likely to be malignant, to genomic analysis of low-stage melanomas to predict metastatic risk. The purpose of this review is to concisely update practitioners on the research behind the latest tools available for melanoma detection and diagnosis, as well as the implications of these technologies for melanoma management.

Framing recommendations to promote prevention behaviors among people at high risk: A simulation study of responses to melanoma genetic test reporting

A CDKN2A/p16 mutation confers 76 % lifetime risk of developing melanoma to US residents, and high-risk individuals are counseled to use sunscreen. Generally, for patients at population risk, gain framing more effectively promotes prevention behaviors; however, it is unknown whether loss frames might more effectively promote behavioral intentions and perceived control over disease risk among high-risk patients. Undergraduates (N = 146) underwent a simulated genetic counseling and test reporting session for hereditary melanoma. Participants watched a video of a genetic counselor providing information in which genetic risk of melanoma (Low: 15 %; High: 76 %) and framed recommendations to use sunscreen (Loss: Risk may increase by 15 % if don't use sunscreen; Gain: Risk may decrease by 15 % if use sunscreen) were manipulated. Controlling for baseline sunscreen use, high-risk participants given loss frames reported greater beliefs that sunscreen would reduce risk than high-risk participants given gain frames. Further, high-risk participants with fair skin tended to report greater intentions to use sunscreen when given loss frames versus gain frames. Perceived control over risk mediated the effect of message frame and disease risk on intentions to use sunscreen. When counseling patients with elevated cancer risk, genetic counselors may consider framing prevention behavioral recommendations in terms of potential losses.

Impact of melanoma genetic test reporting on perceived control over melanoma prevention

To determine whether receiving melanoma genetic test results undermines perceived control over melanoma prevention, control-related beliefs were examined among 60 adults from melanoma-prone families receiving CDKN2A/p16 test results (27 unaffected noncarriers, 15 unaffected carriers, 18 affected carriers; response rate at 2 years = 64.9 % of eligible respondents). Multilevel modeling of perceived control ratings over a 2-year period revealed significant variation in individual trajectories: most participants showed increases (45 %) or no change (38.3 %), while 16.7 % showed decreases. At the group level, noncarriers reported sustained increases through the 2-year follow-up (ps < .05); unaffected carriers reported significant short-term increases (ps < .05); and affected carriers reported no change. Participants in all groups continued to rate photoprotection as highly effective in reducing melanoma risk and reported decreased beliefs that carrying the p16 mutation would inevitably lead to the development of melanoma. Qualitative responses immediately following counseling and test reporting corroborated these findings, as 93 % indicated it was possible to either prevent (64.9 %) or decrease the likelihood (28.1 %) of future melanomas. Thus, genetic test reporting does not generally undermine perceived control over melanoma prevention, though variability in response to positive results warrants future study.

Common genetic risk for melanoma encourages preventive behavior change

There is currently great interest in using genetic risk estimates for common disease in personalized healthcare. Here we assess melanoma risk-related preventive behavioral change in the context of the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC). As part of on-going reporting activities within the project, participants received a personalized risk assessment including information related to their own self-reported family history of melanoma and a genetic risk variant showing a moderate effect size (1.7, 3.0 respectively for heterozygous and homozygous individuals). Participants who opted to view their report were sent an optional outcome survey assessing risk perception and behavioral change in the months that followed. Participants that report family history risk, genetic risk, or both risk factors for melanoma were significantly more likely to increase skin cancer preventive behaviors when compared to participants with neither risk factor (ORs = 2.04, 2.79, 4.06 and p-values = 0.02, 2.86 × 10⁻⁵, 4.67 × 10⁻⁵, respectively), and we found the relationship between risk information and behavior to be partially mediated by anxiety. Genomic risk assessments appear to encourage positive behavioral change in a manner that is complementary to family history risk information and therefore may represent a useful addition to standard of care for melanoma prevention.

Barriers to risk-understanding and risk-reduction behaviors among individuals with a family history of melanoma

Family members of melanoma patients are often called upon to provide support, ranging from monetary to medical assistance. Consanguineal relatives of melanoma patients are also at greater risk of developing the disease themselves. However, as a group, they have limited understanding of their melanoma risk and they demonstrate inadequate primary and secondary prevention behaviors. The optimal intervention strategies for improving the consistent use of such behaviors (i.e., improving rates of sun-protection behaviors and screening) remains unclear, necessitating further research.

[Recommendations for genetic testing and management of individuals genetically at-risk of cutaneous melanoma]

Cutaneous melanoma is a multifactorial disease resulting from both environmental and genetic factors. Five susceptibility genes have been identified over the past years, comprising high-risk susceptibility genes (CDKN2A, CDK4, and BAP1 genes) and intermediate-risk susceptibility genes (MITF, and MC1R genes). The aim of this expert consensus was to define clinical contexts justifying genetic analyses, to describe the conduct of these analyses, and to propose surveillance recommendations. Given the regulatory constraints, it is recommended that dermatologists work in tandem with a geneticist. Genetic analysis may be prescribed when at least two episodes of histologically proven invasive cutaneous melanoma have been diagnosed before the age of 75 years in two 1st or 2nd degree relatives or in the same individual. The occurrence in the same individual or in a relative of invasive cutaneous melanoma with ocular melanoma, pancreatic cancer, renal cancer, mesothelioma or a central nervous system tumour are also indications for genetic testing. Management is based upon properly managed photoprotection and dermatological monitoring according to genetic status. Finally, depending on the mutated gene and the familial history, associated tumour risks require specific management (e.g. ocular melanoma, pancreatic cancer). Due to the rapid progress in genetics, these recommendations will need to be updated regularly.

Unaffected family members report improvements in daily routine sun protection 2 years following melanoma genetic testing

PURPOSE

Reducing ultraviolet radiation exposure may decrease melanoma risk in the hereditary melanoma setting. It is unknown whether genetic counseling and test reporting of CDKN2A/p16 mutation status promote long-term compliance with photoprotection recommendations, especially in unaffected mutation carriers.

METHODS

This study evaluated changes 2 years following melanoma genetic testing in self-reported practice of sun protection (sunscreen, photoprotective clothing, and ultraviolet radiation avoidance) among 37 members of two CDKN2A/p16 kindreds (10 unaffected carriers, 11 affected carriers, and 16 unaffected noncarriers; response rate = 64.9% of eligible participants).

RESULTS

Multivariate profile analysis indicated that all three participant groups reported increased daily routine practice of sun protection 2 years following melanoma genetic testing (P < 0.02), with 96.9% reporting that at least one sun protection behavior was part of their daily routine, up from 78.1% at baseline (P < 0.015). Unaffected carriers (P < 0.024) and unaffected noncarriers (P < 0.027) reported significantly more frequent use of photoprotective clothing. Affected carriers maintained adherence to all sun protection behaviors. Reported sunburns in the past 6 months decreased significantly (P < 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Members of high-risk families reported increased daily routine sun protection and decreased sunburns 2 years following melanoma genetic testing, with no net decline in sun protection following negative test results. Thus, genetic testing and counseling may motivate sustained improvements in prevention behaviors.

Future perspectives in melanoma research: meeting report from the "Melanoma Bridge", Napoli, December 5th-8th 2013

The fourth "Melanoma Bridge Meeting" took place in Naples, December 5 to 8th, 2013. The four topics discussed at this meeting were: Diagnosis and New Procedures, Molecular Advances and Combination Therapies, News in Immunotherapy, and Tumor Microenvironment and Biomarkers.

Perceived risk following melanoma genetic testing: a 2-year prospective study distinguishing subjective estimates from recall

A major goal of predictive genetic testing is to alert people to their risk before illness onset; however, little is known about how risk perceptions change following genetic testing and whether information is recalled accurately over time. In the United States, a CDKN2A/p16 mutation confers 76 % lifetime risk of melanoma. Following genetic counseling and test reporting, subjective risk estimates and recall of counselor-provided risk estimates were assessed 5 times over the next 2 years among 60 adult members of 2 extended CDKN2A/p16 kindreds. No sustained changes from baseline in risk perceptions were reported. Unaffected carriers (n = 15) consistently reported significantly lower subjective risk estimates (46 %) than they were actually given (76 %, p < 0.001) or recalled having been given (60 %, p < 0.001). Noncarriers' (n = 27) risk estimates decreased following results disclosure, but rebounded, with both subjective and recalled estimates subsequently exceeding what they were told by the counselor (both ps < 0.001). Affected carriers' (n = 18) risk estimates for developing a new melanoma corresponded well to counselor-provided information (p = 0.362). For all 3 patient groups, results were consistent across multiple risk measures and remained similar when demographic, phenotypic, and baseline behavioral contributors to melanoma risk were statistically controlled. These findings are consistent with other studies of risk perception, but additional studies of more diverse populations are needed to understand the reasons behind both the persistence of initial risk estimates and their divergence from information provided by the counselor during genetic counseling. Additionally, determining whether holding subjective risk perceptions that differ from counselor-provided information ultimately affects adherence to management recommendations will help guide the presentation of risk information in genetic counseling practice.

Clinical applications of melanoma genetics

Families that have several relatives with melanoma, multiple primary melanomas in one individual, younger than average ages of melanoma onset, and/or the presence of both pancreatic cancer and melanoma may be suggestive of a hereditary melanoma syndrome and are candidates for genetic counseling and risk assessment. Genetic counseling for hereditary melanoma presents many complexities. Only a minority of hereditary melanoma cases have been attributed to a single genetic factor, CDKN2A. Both the frequency and the penetrance of CDKN2A mutations has been shown to be dependent on multiple factors. The clinical utility of genetic testing for hereditary melanoma families is debatable because CDKN2A status may not impact medical management in patients with melanoma. No standard medical management guidelines exist for families with CDKN2A mutations; however, family history of melanoma and pancreatic cancer may warrant further discussion. Clinicians should discuss the clinical and psychological implications before genetic testing. Genetic counseling and pretest education regarding melanoma risk factors provides an opportunity to increase knowledge and understanding of melanoma risk, while addressing psychological risks and concerns.

Melanoma genetic counseling and test reporting improve screening adherence among unaffected carriers 2 years later

BACKGROUND

A major goal of predictive genetic testing for melanoma is to promote early detection to reduce mortality. This study evaluated the long-term impact of melanoma genetic test reporting and counseling on screening adherence.

METHODS

This study assessed adherence to recommendations for annual total body skin examinations (TBSE) and monthly skin self-examinations (SSE) among 37 members of Utah CDKN2A/p16 kindreds (10 unaffected carriers, 11 affected carriers, and 16 unaffected noncarriers; response rate = 64.9% of eligible participants).

RESULTS

Two years following test reporting, adherence to annual TBSE among unaffected carriers increased from 40% to 70%. However, unaffected noncarriers' adherence decreased from 56% to 13%. Affected carriers reported TBSEs at both assessments (91% and 82%, respectively). Monthly SSE frequency remained highly variable in all patient groups: at 2 years, 29.7% reported monthly SSEs, 27.0% reported more frequent self-examinations, and 43.2% reported underscreening. However, SSE quality improved significantly: participants checked more body sites at 2 years than at baseline, especially feet, shoulders, legs, and genitals. Perceived logistic barriers to TBSEs (e.g., expensive, inconvenient) and SSEs (hard to remember, time-consuming) predicted lower adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Unaffected carriers reported increased TBSE adherence and thoroughness of SSEs 2 years following melanoma genetic test reporting, suggesting clinical benefit in this modest sample. Unaffected noncarriers reported comparable gains in SSE thoroughness, but decreased TBSEs.

IMPACT

Melanoma genetic counseling and test reporting may improve adherence among unaffected carrier members of p16 families. Further interventions to reduce logistic barriers and to promote continued screening adherence among unaffected noncarrier family members may be needed.

Genetic testing by cancer site: skin

Many hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes are associated with cutaneous findings, both benign and malignant. Dermatological examination and histopathology, when combined with a thorough personal and family medical history, play an important role in the diagnosis of cancer predisposition syndromes. Skin findings are an important diagnostic tool for a variety of cancer syndromes, including Cowden syndrome, Birt-Hogg-Dubé, hereditary leiomyomatosis renal cell carcinoma, and others. This article focuses on the phenotype, medical management, and genetic testing for 4 hereditary cancer syndromes that include cutaneous findings: hereditary melanoma, basal cell nevus syndrome, neurofibromatosis type 1, and neurofibromatosis type 2.

Perceptions of genetic research and testing among members of families with an increased risk of malignant melanoma

BACKGROUND

Several melanoma susceptibility genes have been identified. As part of the international genetic research programme of the GenoMEL consortiums research on genetic mutations in melanoma families, the aim of this study was to examine family members' views about their risk of melanoma, gene testing and genetic research.

METHODS

Self-report data were gathered using online and paper-based surveys available in four languages among 312 individuals (62% from Europe, 18% from Australia, 13% from the United States of America (USA) and 7% from Israel).

RESULTS

Fifty three percent had been diagnosed with a melanoma, and 12% had a positive susceptibility gene test result. Respondents with many moles and freckles were more likely to perceive themselves at risk for developing melanoma (odds ratio [OR](Freckles)=2.24 with 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.18-4.26; OR(Many moles)=6.92, 95%CI=2.37-20.23). Respondents who had received a non-informative (negative) genetic test result were much less likely to perceive themselves at increased risk (OR=0.17, 95% CI=0.04-0.73). Safe-guards were perceived as important to protect genetic information, but there was also support for the storage and exchange of such information. Overall, respondents were in favour of genetic testing, even if current knowledge about melanoma risk genes is still limited. Contrary to previous studies, participants reported that a non-informative (negative) genetic test result, although not necessarily indicative of lower risk of melanoma, would be likely to reduce their practise of preventive behaviours.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants were influenced by their phenotype and test results in risk estimations. They expressed positive views on genetic research and towards genetic testing, but reported that a non-informative (negative) test result might be associated with an (erroneous) perception of reduced risk and fewer preventive behaviours. These results highlight the urgency of improving the quality of genetic counselling and increasing the effectiveness of communication regarding genetic test results.

Parental preferences for CDKN2A/p16 testing of minors

PURPOSE

Genetic testing of minors is controversial, as ethical considerations depend on multiple aspects of the particular disease and familial context. For melanoma, there is a well-established and avoidable environmental influence and a documented benefit of early detection.

METHODS

We surveyed 61 CDKN2A/p16 mutation-tested adults from two kindreds about their attitudes toward genetic testing of minors immediately posttesting and 2 years later.

RESULTS

Overall, 86.9% expressed support of melanoma genetic testing of minors, with the importance of risk awareness (77.4%) and the likelihood of improved prevention and screening behaviors (69.8%) as the most frequently cited potential benefits. Among mutation carriers, 82.6% wanted genetic testing for their own children. These preferences remained stable over a 2-year period. Most respondents (62.3%) favored complete involvement of their children in genetic counseling and test reporting; 19.7% suggested that children be tested but not informed of the results. Concerns about inducing psychological distress or compromising children's decision autonomy were infrequently cited. Testing preferences did not vary by respondent age, gender, or melanoma history.

CONCLUSION

Respondents strongly supported melanoma genetic testing of minors, with most citing improved health behavior as a likely outcome. We discuss options for melanoma genetic counseling and testing of minors.

Genetic testing for hereditary melanoma and pancreatic cancer: a longitudinal study of psychological outcome

OBJECTIVE

CDKN2A/p16 mutations confer 76% lifetime risk of melanoma and up to 17% lifetime risk of pancreatic cancer. Our objective was to determine the short- and long-term impact of CDKN2A/p16 genetic counseling and test reporting on psychological distress, cancer worry, and perceived costs and benefits of testing.

METHODS

Prospective changes in anxiety, depression, and cancer worry following CDKN2A/p16 counseling and test reporting were evaluated at multiple assessments over 2 years among 60 adult members of melanoma-prone families; 37 participants completed the 2-year follow-up. Quantitative and qualitative assessments of the costs and benefits of testing were carried out. Outcomes were evaluated among unaffected noncarriers (n = 27), unaffected carriers (n = 15), and affected carriers (n = 18).

RESULTS

Reported anxiety and depression were low. For carriers and noncarriers, anxiety decreased significantly throughout the 2-year period, whereas depression and melanoma worry showed short-term decreases. Worry about pancreatic cancer was low and decreased significantly. In all groups, test-related distress and uncertainty were low, regret was absent, and positive experiences were high. All participants (>93% at each assessment) reported at least one perceived benefit of genetic testing; only 15.9% listed any negative aspect. Carriers reported increased knowledge about melanoma risk and prevention (78.3%) and increased prevention and screening behaviors for self and family (65.2%). Noncarriers reported increased knowledge (95.2%) and emotional benefits (71.4%).

CONCLUSION

Among US participants familiar with their hereditary melanoma risk through prior epidemiological research participation, CDKN2A/p16 genetic testing provides multiple perceived benefits to both carriers and noncarriers without inducing distress in general or worry about melanoma or pancreatic cancer.