Factors influencing intrafamilial communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic information

Developing and assessing a kin keeping scale with application to identifying central influencers in African American family networks

Promoting family communication about inherited disease risk is an arena in which family systems theory is highly relevant. One family systems' construct that can support promotion of family communication regarding inherited disease risk is the notion of "kin keeping." However, kin keeping and whether it might be capitalized on to encourage family communication about inherited risk has been understudied. The goal of this report was to propose a broadened conceptualization of kin keeping that distinguishes between a structural functional perspective (role conceptualization) and transitional behaviors (skill conceptualization), and to develop and evaluate a scale that would enable this assertion to be tested among a sample of African American community health workers. We developed a scale using four steps: item development using concept analysis and content validity, scale development among a national sample (n = 312), scale evaluation using exploratory factor analysis (n = 52), and scale reduction. We then posed suppositions of associations that would indicate whether the developed kin keeping measure was assessing a specific family role or set of behaviors. Our results included the development of the first quantitative measure of kin keeping (9- and 15-item scales). Model fit for 9-item scale (CFI = 0.97, AFGI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.09, SMRM = 0.06) and model fit for 15-item scale (CFI = 0.97, AFGI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.06, SMRM = 0.05). These findings allow us to move toward more rigorous research about the role of kin keeping on information sharing and health decision making. Results also suggest that, contrary to the historical structural functional conceptualization of kin keeping as a role, kin keeping might also be conceptualized as a behavior or set of modifiable behaviors. Ultimately, the kin keeping scale could be used to operationalize kin keeping in various theoretical models and frameworks, guide intervention development to encourage or train for kin keeping behaviors, and test assumptions of whether families vary in the density of kin keeping.

Your Family Connects: A Theory-Based Intervention to Encourage Communication about Possible Inherited Cancer Risk among Ovarian Cancer Survivors and Close Relatives

INTRODUCTION

Encouraging family communication about possible genetic risk has become among the most important avenues for achieving the full potential of genomic discovery for primary and secondary prevention. Yet, effective family-wide risk communication (i.e., conveying genetic risk status and its meaning for other family members) remains a critical gap in the field. We aim to describe the iterative process of developing a scalable population-based communication outreach intervention, Your Family Connects, to reach ovarian cancer survivors and close relatives to communicate the potential for inherited risk and to consider genetic counseling.

METHODS

Relational-level theories (e.g., interdependence theory) suggest that interventions to promote family cancer risk communication will be most effective if they consider the qualities of specific relationships and activate motives to preserve the relationship. Informed by these theories, we collaborated with 14 citizen scientists (survivors of ovarian cancer or relatives) and collected 261 surveys and 39 structured interviews over 12 weeks of citizen science activities in 2020.

RESULTS

The citizen science findings and consideration of relational-level theories informed the content and implementation of Your Family Connects (www.yourfamilyconnects.org). CS results showed survivors favor personal contact with close relatives, but relatives were open to alternative contact methods, such as through health professionals. Recognizing the need for varied approaches based on relationship dynamics, we implemented a relative contact menu to enable survivors identify at-risk relatives and provide multiple contact options (i.e., survivor contact, health professional contact, and delayed contact). In line with relational autonomy principles, we included pros and cons for each option, assisting survivors in choosing suitable contact methods for each relative.

DISCUSSION

Our developed intervention represents a novel application of relational-level theories and partnership with citizen scientists to expand genetic services reach to increase the likelihood for fair distribution of cancer genomic advances. The Your Family Connects intervention as part of a randomized trial in collaboration with the Georgia Cancer Registry compared with standard outreach.

Cultural adaptations to a telephone genetic counseling protocol and booklet for Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Telephone genetic counseling (TGC) is accepted as standard clinical care for people seeking hereditary cancer risk assessment. TGC has been shown to be non-inferior to in-person genetic counseling, but trials have been conducted with a predominantly highly educated, non-Hispanic White population. This article describes the process of culturally adapting a TGC protocol and visual aid booklet for Spanish-preferring Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. The adaptation process included two phases. Phase 1 involved a review of the literature and recommendations from an expert team including community partners. Phase 2 included interviews and a pilot with the target population (n = 14) to collect feedback about the adapted protocol and booklet following steps from the Learner Verification and Revision Framework. We describe the adaptation process and report the main adaptations following the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Interventions (FRAME). Adaptations in Phase 1 were responsive to the target population needs and characteristics (e.g., delivered in Spanish at an appropriate health literacy level, addressing knowledge gaps, targeting cultural values). Phase 2 interviews were crucial to refine details (e.g., selecting words) and to add components to address GCT barriers (e.g., saliva sample video). Cultural adaptations to evidence-based TGC protocols can increase the fit and quality of care for historically underserved populations. As TGC visits become routine in clinical care, it is crucial to consider the needs of diverse communities to adequately promote equity and justice in cancer care.

Communication about hereditary cancer risk to offspring: A systematic review of children's perspective

OBJECTIVE

The present review describes how children experience hereditary cancer risk communication within the family.

METHODS

Searches for studies between 1990 and 2020 on PubMed and EBSCO were undertaken, and 15 studies met the inclusion criteria, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The findings informed: (1) how, when and what is discussed about hereditary cancer risk in the family; (2) how does family communication about hereditary cancer risk impact children on psychosocial and behavioral outcomes; (3) what are the child's preferences regarding hereditary cancer risk communication within the family.

RESULTS

Disclosure is done mostly by both parents, or mothers only, which is in accordance with the children's preferences. Children value open communication about cancer risk with their parents, although they report experiences of fear, surprise, feeling unhappy, and concern about the increased risk of cancer. Regardless of the method of disclosure, children may be particularly sensitive to their parent's emotional state at the time of disclosure, and they learn from their parents' experiences the potential implications of cancer risk. Children also report that it would be helpful to learn more about genetic cancer syndromes via written materials, and/or meet a genetic counselor.

CONCLUSIONS

Children rely on their parents as the primary models of the hereditary cancer experience. Therefore, parents play a central role in the psychological adjustment of children. Findings point to the relevance of family-centered care in hereditary cancer risk that targets not only the mutation carrier individually but also their children and partners.

Family Communication about Diagnostic Genetic Testing for Younger-Onset Dementia

Younger-onset dementia (YOD) refers to onset before 65 years of age and may be associated with a genetic cause. Family communication surrounding any genetic risk is complex, and this process may be further complicated in a YOD context due to its effects on cognition, behaviour, and associated psychosocial consequences. This study aimed to investigate how individuals experience family communication about potential genetic risk and testing for YOD. Thematic analysis was performed on verbatim transcripts of nine semi-structured interviews undertaken with family members who attended a neurogenetics clinic due to a relative diagnosed with YOD. The interviews explored the participants’ experiences of learning that YOD might be inherited and the ensuing family communication about genetic testing. Four key themes emerged: (1) a clinical diagnostic odyssey was common and could be a motivator for genomic testing, (2) pre-existing family tension and/or disconnection was a common barrier, (3) family members’ autonomy was considered, and (4) avoidant coping strategies influenced communication. Communication regarding potential YOD genetic risk is a complicated process and may be influenced by pre-existing family dynamics, individual coping mechanisms, and a desire to promote autonomy in relatives. To promote effective risk communication, genetic counsellors should pre-emptively address family tensions that may be exacerbated in the context of genetic testing for YOD, with awareness that family strain during a preceding period of diagnostic odyssey is common. Genetic counsellors can offer psychosocial support to facilitate coping with this tension in an adaptive way. The findings also indicated the importance of extending genetic counselling support to relatives.

The Communication Chain of Genetic Risk: Analyses of Narrative Data Exploring Proband–Provider and Proband–Family Communication in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

Low uptake of genetic services among members of families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) suggests limitations of proband-mediated communication of genetic risk. This study explored how genetic information proceeds from healthcare providers to probands and from probands to relatives, from the probands’ perspectives. Using a grounded-theory approach, we analyzed narrative data collected with individual interviews and focus groups from a sample of 48 women identified as carriers of HBOC-associated pathogenic variants from three linguistic regions of Switzerland. The findings describe the “communication chain”, confirming the difficulties of proband-mediated communication. Provider–proband communication is impacted by a three-level complexity in the way information about family communication is approached by providers, received by probands, and followed-up by the healthcare system. Probands’ decisions regarding disclosure of genetic risk are governed by dynamic and often contradictory logics of action, interconnected with individual and family characteristics, eventually compelling probands to engage in an arbitrating process. The findings highlight the relevance of probands’ involvement in the communication of genetic risk to relatives, suggesting the need to support them in navigating the complexity of family communication rather than replacing them in this process. Concrete actions at the clinical and health system levels are needed to improve proband-mediated communication.

Patient-reported anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing cancer genetic risk information with family members

While prior studies have largely focused on family communication of diagnostic single-gene test results or specific types of cancer testing results, far less work has investigated family communication of cancer-related genetic results that include multi-gene panels, a broad array of cancer types/stages, and participants without family history of cancer. The study we report here examined individuals' anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing genetic information with family members. An 80+ gene panel was performed on participants recruited from Mayo Clinic, diagnosed with different cancer types, who did not have a family history suggestive of an inherited risk. Participants completed a 49-item survey before receiving genetic test results. Family variant testing was provided to family members at no cost, allowing factors influencing intent to share to be examined in the absence of financial burdens. In all, 1721 of 2984 individuals who received genetic testing completed the survey (57.7% completion rate). Participants' intent to share with parents, siblings, and children was inversely related to the number of anticipated barriers to sharing and directly related to the number of anticipated benefits to sharing. Of those participants who did not intend to share with parents, siblings, and adult children, 64.8%, 30.3%, and 67.6% reported that there were no barriers, while 17.1%, 24.5%, and 40.2.% reported there were no benefits. Findings indicate that barriers to sharing genetic information with family members vary across family member types, and an inability to identify at least one benefit of sharing with family members is a predictor of intent not to share.

A systematic literature review of disclosure practices and reported outcomes for medically actionable genomic secondary findings

Purpose:

Secondary findings (SF) are present in 1–4% of individuals undergoing genome/exome sequencing. A review of how SF are disclosed and what outcomes result from their receipt is urgent and timely.

Methods:

We conducted a systematic literature review of SF disclosure practices and outcomes after receipt including cascade testing, family and provider communication, and healthcare actions. Of the 1,184 non-duplicate records screened we summarize findings from 27 included research articles describing SF disclosure practices, outcomes after receipt, or both.

Results:

The included articles reported 709 unique SF index recipients/families. Referrals and/or recommendations were provided 647 SF recipients and outcome data were available for 236. At least one recommended evaluation was reported for 146 SF recipients; 16 reports of treatment or prophylactic surgery were identified. We found substantial variations in how the constructs of interest were defined and described.

Conclusion:

Variation in how SF disclosure and outcomes were described limited our ability to compare findings. We conclude the literature provided limited insight into how the ACMG guidelines have been translated into precision health outcomes for SF recipients. Robust studies of SF recipients are needed and should be prioritized for future research.

Factors that Influence Intent to Share Genetic Information Related to Cancer Risk with Family Members

We describe factors influencing patient decisions to share positive cancer genetic test results with family members. We focused on patients who were diagnosed with several different cancer types but did not have a family history that was suggestive of an inherited risk. Participants were recruited from Mayo Clinic and had been recently diagnosed with cancer. An 80+ gene panel was performed. Before receiving genetic test results, patients completed a 49-item survey on their intent to share their results with relatives. 1,721 (57.7%) of 2,984 individuals who elected to pursue genetic testing completed the survey. Most patients planned to share cancer-related genetic results with a spouse or partner (97.0%), at least one adult child (92.2%), at least one sibling (86.2%), and with at least one parent (70.3%). Familial support scores and familial communication scores were predictive of intent to share cancer-related genetic test results. Our data highlight differences in family communication capacity and support that are important for clinicians to consider when supporting patients who wish to share cancer-related genetic test results with family members. Our data point to several potential interventional strategies that might increase the likelihood of cancer-related genetic test results being shared with family members at risk.

Using a Tailored Digital Health Intervention for Family Communication and Cascade Genetic Testing in Swiss and Korean Families With Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Protocol for the DIALOGUE Study

Background

In hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), family communication of genetic test results is essential for cascade genetic screening, that is, identifying and testing blood relatives of known mutation carriers to determine whether they also carry the pathogenic variant, and to propose preventive and clinical management options. However, up to 50% of blood relatives are unaware of relevant genetic information, suggesting that potential benefits of genetic testing are not communicated effectively within family networks. Technology can facilitate communication and genetic education within HBOC families.

Objective

The aims of this study are to develop the K-CASCADE (Korean–Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) cohort in Korea by expanding an infrastructure developed by the CASCADE (Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) Consortium in Switzerland; develop a digital health intervention to support the communication of cancer predisposition for Swiss and Korean HBOC families, based on linguistic and cultural adaptation of the Family Gene Toolkit; evaluate its efficacy on primary (family communication of genetic results and cascade testing) and secondary (psychological distress, genetic literacy, active coping, and decision making) outcomes; and explore its translatability using the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance framework.

Methods

The digital health intervention will be available in French, German, Italian, Korean, and English and can be accessed via the web, mobile phone, or tablet (ie, device-agnostic). K-CASCADE cohort of Korean HBOC mutation carriers and relatives will be based on the CASCADE infrastructure. Narrative data collected through individual interviews or mini focus groups from 20 to 24 HBOC family members per linguistic region and 6-10 health care providers involved in genetic services will identify the local cultures and context, and inform the content of the tailored messages. The efficacy of the digital health intervention against a comparison website will be assessed in a randomized trial with 104 HBOC mutation carriers (52 in each study arm). The translatability of the digital health intervention will be assessed using survey data collected from HBOC families and health care providers.

Results

Funding was received in October 2019. It is projected that data collection will be completed by January 2023 and results will be published in fall 2023.

Conclusions

This study addresses the continuum of translational research, from developing an international research infrastructure and adapting an existing digital health intervention to testing its efficacy in a randomized controlled trial and exploring its translatability using an established framework. Adapting existing interventions, rather than developing new ones, takes advantage of previous valid experiences without duplicating efforts. Culturally sensitive web-based interventions that enhance family communication and understanding of genetic cancer risk are timely. This collaboration creates a research infrastructure between Switzerland and Korea that can be scaled up to cover other hereditary cancer syndromes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04214210; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04214210 and CRiS KCT0005643; https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/26264

Intrafamilial communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic information in Italian women: towards a personalised approach

Genomic testing expansion is accompanied by an increasing need for genetic counselling and intrafamilial communication. Genetic counselling can play an important role in facilitating intrafamilial communication and relationships. We conducted a cross-sectional, multicenter study including 252 Italian women, using a questionnaire divided in two sections, the first one to be filled after the pre-test counselling and the second after receiving BRCA test results. We assessed the factors influencing intrafamilial disclosure of genetic information for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, family members with whom probands are more prone to share genetic information, and the perceived understanding of information received by counselees during genetic counselling. Women were accompanied to the counselling more often by their husband/partner. Among those with a positive BRCA test result, 49% intended to communicate it to their offspring and 27% to their husband/partner. Younger women, those living with their husband/partner, and those who described family communication as open/profound and spontaneous/sincere had a higher probability of being accompanied during genetic counselling and discuss about it with relatives. Spontaneous/sincere or open/profound family communication and joyful/happy familial relationships were associated with the decision to undergo genetic testing as a responsibility towards relatives. Women had a good understanding of counselling contents (mean score 9.27 in a scale 1-10). Genetic counselling providers should consider that genetic information disclosure does not depend only on the clarity of the information provided, but also on pre-existing intrafamilial communication and relationships, family structure and marital status, indicating the need for a personalised approach accounting for these factors.

From Probands to Relatives: Communication of Genetic Risk for Hereditary Breast-Ovarian Cancer and Its Influence on Subsequent Testing

BACKGROUND

The genetic risk communication from proband to relatives varies from family to family, and patients often need support with the communication of genetic test results and making decisions to manage hereditary cancer risks.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterize the communication of BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genetic risk from proband to first-degree relatives (FDRs) using a social network framework.

METHODS

We characterized network and nonnetwork factors to explore their association with which FDRs were told about the genetic risk and whether or not relatives underwent genetic testing. Ninety-two female probands with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer who have confirmed BRCA1/2 mutations participated in the study. Communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk was assessed between 92 probands and their 417 FDRs.

RESULTS

Of 92 probands, 94.5% (n = 87) communicated their genetic test result to at least one of their FDRs. Of FDRs older than 18 years, 19.9% (n = 72) have genetic testing. Emotional closeness, educational level of the proband, and relative's age were significantly associated with communicating test results with FDRs.

CONCLUSION

Communication of genetic risk with the FDRs after having a BRCA1/2 gene-mutation-positive test result was high in this group of cancer patients. However, the rate of genetic testing among FDRs was low.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Probands' educational level and age of relatives for cascade genetic screening should be considered during counseling. Interventions to support women with BRCA1/2 mutations during the communication process and their family members' engagement in testing and risk-reducing strategies are needed.

Parent of Origin Effects on Family Communication of Risk in BRCA+ Women: A Qualitative Investigation of Human Factors in Cascade Screening

Pathogenic germline variants in Breast Cancer 1/2 (BRCA) genes confer increased cancer risk. Understanding BRCA status/risk can enable family cascade screening and improve cancer outcomes. However, more than half of the families do not communicate family cancer history/BRCA status, and cancer outcomes differ according to parent of origin (i.e., maternally vs. paternally inherited pathogenic variant). We aimed to explore communication patterns around family cancer history/BRCA risk according to parent of origin. We analyzed qualitative interviews (n = 97) using template analysis and employed the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to identify interventions to improve communication. Interviews revealed sub-codes of ‘male stoicism and ‘paternal guilt’ that impede family communication (template code: gender scripting). Conversely, ‘fatherly protection’ and ‘female camaraderie’ promote communication of risk. The template code ‘dysfunctional family communication’ was contextualized by several sub-codes (‘harmful negligence’, ‘intra-family ignorance’ and ‘active withdrawal of support’) emerging from interview data. Sub-codes ‘medical misconceptions’ and ‘medical minimizing’ deepened our understanding of the template code ‘medical biases’. Importantly, sub-codes of ‘informed physicians’ and ‘trust in healthcare’ mitigated bias. Mapping findings to the TPB identified variables to tailor interventions aimed at enhancing family communication of risk and promoting cascade screening. In conclusion, these data provide empirical evidence of the human factors impeding communication of family BRCA risk. Tailored, theory-informed interventions merit consideration for overcoming blocked communication and improving cascade screening uptake.

Communication of genetic information to at-risk relatives during the multidisciplinary monitoring of vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome in a French referral clinic

Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (vEDS) is a rare inherited disorder leading to arterial, digestive, and uterine complications due to pathogenic COL3A1 variants. Identification of causal variants allows family screening, provided that relatives have previously been informed, according to a 2013 French Decree. The aims of our study were to assess the communication of genetic information to at-risk relatives, the impact of diagnosis disclosure and to highlight a possible link between the experience of vEDS patients and ability to communicate about genetic information. A total of n = 51 vEDS adult probands answered a questionnaire during a clinical visit. Communication to relatives was considered effective if the proband gave information to some or all first-degree relatives and considered easily achieved if it was disclosed to all relatives less than a month after the diagnosis and without difficulty. Personal and family vEDS experiences of probands were also assessed. Effective communication of information to relatives was remarkably high (98%). Siblings were the most frequently informed relatives (82%). Women informed their at-risk relatives of genetic family screening faster (p = .006) and easier (p = .004) than men. There was no difference in the disclosure of information to relatives before and after 2013 in our multidisciplinary clinic. Regarding the lived experience of vEDS patients, they felt anxious (78%) at diagnosis disclosure but also considered this diagnosis as an opportunity to start a medical follow-up (82%) putting an end to diagnosis delay. Our findings highlight for the first time that the ability to easily inform at-risk first-degree relatives is related to the relief felt during vEDS-positive diagnosis disclosure (p = .04). In order to improve the communication of genetic information to relatives, we believe that psychological support should systematically be part of the multidisciplinary monitoring, just as medical follow-up and genetic counseling.

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.

Uptake of genetic counseling among adult children of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in France

OBJECTIVE

Genetic counseling in at-risk families is known to improve cancer prevention. Our study aimed to determine the rate of uptake of genetic counseling among adult children of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and to identify the potential psychosocial factors associated with uptake of genetic counseling.

METHODS

A self-reported questionnaire was mailed to 328 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers 10 years after BRCA1/2 test disclosure. Of the 233 carriers who returned the questionnaire (response rate = 71%), 135 reported having children over age 18 years and were therefore included in the analysis. Generalized estimating equations models were used to identify the factors associated with uptake of genetic counseling among adult children of mutation carriers.

RESULTS

Data were gathered for a total of 296 children (46% male, 54% female). The vast majority were informed about the familial mutation (90.9%) and 113 (38%; 95% CI, 32%-44%) underwent genetic counseling. This percentage exceeded 80% in women over 40 years. In the multivariate model, female sex, advanced age, mutation in the father, diagnosis of cancer in the mutation-carrying parent after genetic testing, and good family relationships were all factors associated with higher uptake of genetic counseling.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult children of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in France do not undergo genetic counseling sufficiently often. Further studies should be conducted on the psychosocial factors that hinder the uptake of genetic counseling among adult children of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Cancer genetic health communication in families tested for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk: a qualitative investigation of impact on children's genetic health literacy and psychosocial adjustment

Children's literacy about the genetics of late-onset hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) often develops through conversations with parents about BRCA gene testing and adults' cancer diagnoses. These conversations may promote early understanding of HBOC, but the long-term impact on children's psychosocial adjustment remains unclear. We investigated cancer genetic health communication in BRCA-tested families to consider benefits, risks, and moderating influences on children's understanding and well-being. Adolescent and young adult children (ages 12-24) of mothers who underwent BRCA testing 1+ years previously completed qualitative interviews that were transcribed, coded (intercoder K ≥ .70), and content-analyzed (N = 34). Children readily recalled conversations about BRCA testing and HBOC (100%) that they considered important (94%), but implications for children were ambiguous and obfuscated their concerns. Psychosocial impacts were muted, multifaceted, and displayed a range of favorable (82%), neutral (71%), and unfavorable (59%) response-frequently co-occurring within the same child over different aspects (e.g., medical, concern for self and others). Children verbalized active (50%) and avoidant (38%) coping strategies: about 1:5 endorsed transient thoughts about vulnerability to HBOC, 1:3 had not further considered it, and all reported specific actions they had or would undertake to remain healthy (e.g., diet/exercise). A majority (94%) of children had or would consider genetic testing for themselves, usually later in life (59%). Long-term outcomes highlighted benefits (awareness of HBOC, psychological hardiness, healthier lifestyle behaviors), as well as some psychosocial concerns that could be managed through interventions promoting genetic health literacy.

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.

Evaluation of the template letter regarding the disclosure of genetic information within the family in France

The 2011 French Bioethics Law regarding disclosure of genetic information within families enables health professionals to notify any at-risk relatives directly, with the patient's consent, using a template letter. To assess the impact of this template letter in terms of understanding, personal feelings and intent to contact a health professional, we conducted a study interviewing patients, members of the public and genetic professionals. Although the main response to the letter was anxiety, this was associated with good understanding of the content and most individuals mentioned intention to contact a health professional.

Predictors and interdependence of family support in a random sample of long-term young breast cancer survivors and their biological relatives

OBJECTIVE

Women diagnosed with breast cancer younger than 45 years (young breast cancer survivors-YBCS) and their biological relatives face significant stressors. Although family support is an important coping resource, little is known about YBCS' and relatives' support and whether it is interdependent. The study described family support in YBCS and their biological relatives; identified demographic, clinical, and psychosocial predictors of support; and determined the interdependence of support in YBCS-relatives family units.

METHODS

Data were collected from a random sample of YBCS and their first- or second-degree female relatives. Actor-partner interdependence models (APIM) explored predictors and interdependence of YBCS' and relatives' family support in dyads (YBCS and relative) and triads (YBCS and two relatives).

RESULTS

Among n = 310 YBCS and n = 431 first- or second-degree relatives, family support was higher in triads compared to dyads. APIMs identified actor effects in dyads, and actor and partner effects in triads. Across all family units, YBCS' higher self-efficacy was associated with higher YBCS support (actor effect) and relative support (partner effect); YBCS' prior diagnosis of depression was associated with lower YBCS and relative support (actor and partner effect); cost-related lack of access to care was associated with lower support among YBCS (actor effect) and relatives (actor and partner effect).

CONCLUSIONS

Family support was interdependent and was affected by self-efficacy, depression, and access to care. Interventions should include YBCS and relatives, enhance self-efficacy and access to care.

[Prevention of genetic diseases : the return of the family practitioner ?]

BACKGROUND

Information to kin is one of the major ethical problems of the new genetics. In France, the revised bioethics law in 2011 created the possibility for patients to authorize professionals, under certain conditions, to directly contact their relatives at risk. Beyond this, other actors, such as GPs, could however play a role in this process.

METHODS

Our article is based on an ethnographic-type sociological study by observations and semi-structured interviews with patients (n=59) and genetic professionals (n=16) that took place from 2014 to 2016 in three genetic hospital wards in France and Canada. It focuses particularly on genetic predispositions to breast and ovarian cancers as well as genetic hemochromatosis.

RESULTS

Because of its position as a primary care specialist, the general practitioner can play a decisive role in the process of informing relatives about genetic disorders. Upstream of the genetic test, the generalist, thanks to his knowledge of the family context of his patients, can play a referral role towards a specialized consultation. Downstream, it can also ensure a more effective follow-up of the information procedures undertaken by its patients thanks to the medical follow-up that it carries out.

CONCLUSION

The data collected during our study highlight the unprecedented place that could be that of the general practitioner in the field of prevention in genetics. At the articulation between primary care and highly specialized care, it is the figure of the "family" doctor who seems to be called here to be renewed by genetics.

Is there a "right time" for bad news? Kairos in familial communication on hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

Time has long been considered as an important dimension of the process of disclosure of information about genetic risk to kin. The question of the "right time to tell" has been frequently noticed but seldom placed at the centre of the analyses of social scientists. Based on an ethnographical fieldwork in a French cancer genetics clinic, this article aims to show that many dimensions of the practical issues of disclosure to family can be fruitfully addressed through the temporal lens of kairos. Relying on the case of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk, it firstly highlights the existence of a mismatch between the "chronological" time of prevention proposed by professionals and the "kairological" time of disclosure lived by informants. Secondly, it emphasizes the problematic nature of the pragmatic approach of time associated with kairos. On the one hand one can draw some benefits from seeking the right time to inform relatives, but on the other hand waiting on uncertain opportunities to disclose such information can make communication even more difficult.

Communicating with Daughters About Familial Risk of Breast Cancer: Individual, Family, and Provider Influences on Women's Knowledge of Cancer Risk

INTRODUCTION

Women facing complex and uncertain situations such as cancer in their families may seek information from a variety of sources to gain knowledge about cancer risk and reduce uncertainty. We describe and assess the relative importance of information sources about familial breast cancer at the individual, family, and healthcare provider levels influencing women's reporting they had enough information to speak with daughters about breast cancer. This outcome we refer to as being informed about breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sister Study participants, a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer, were surveyed on family cancer history, family communication, social support, and interactions with healthcare providers (n = 11,766). Adjusted percentages and 95% confidence intervals for being informed about breast cancer versus not being informed were computed for individual-, family-, and provider-level characteristics in three steps using multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We found 65% of women reported being informed about breast cancer while 35% did not. Having a trusted person with whom to discuss cancer concerns, having a lower versus higher perceived risk of breast cancer, having undergone genetic counseling, and being satisfied with physician discussions about breast cancer in their families were predictors of being informed about breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Although acquiring objective risk information, such as through genetic counseling, may contribute to a basic level of understanding, communication with providers and within other trusted relationships appears to be an essential component in women's reporting they had all the information they need to talk with their daughters about breast cancer.

Communicating genetic test results within the family: Is it lost in translation? A survey of relatives in the randomized six-step study

Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility genes is increasingly being integrated into medical care. Test results help inform risks of the individual being tested as well as family members who could benefit from knowing the results. The responsibility for informing relatives of genetic test results falls on the proband, the first family member being tested. However, there are several challenges associated with sharing genetic test results within families including incomplete understanding of test results, emotional distance among family members, and poor communication skills. In this paper we describe the communication process between probands randomized to receive BRCA1/2 genetic test results in an enhanced versus a standard of care counseling session, and their first degree relatives with whom they shared results. We contacted 561 first degree relatives of probands who had undergone BRCA1/2 genetic testing to measure their level of understanding of the test results, their difficulty and distress upon hearing the results, the impact of the test results on their risk perception, and their intention to pursue genetic counseling/testing. 82.1 % of relatives correctly reported the test results of their proband. Distress upon hearing the test result was highest for those relatives whose proband received informative test results. Relatives reported a decrease in cancer risk perception after hearing the test results, regardless of the type of result. Intention to pursue counseling/testing was low, even among those relatives whose proband received informative test results. Male relatives were less likely to be informed of test results and more likely to forget hearing them. These results suggest ways to improve the communication process within families.

Cancer Risk Information Sharing: The Experience of Individuals Receiving Genetic Counseling for BRCA1/2 Mutations

Genetic counseling and testing for familial cancer is a unique context for the communication of risk information in the family. This study utilized a theoretical framework based on the family systems perspective to understand intrafamilial cancer risk communication patterns in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Individuals (n = 120) at an elevated risk for BRCA1/2 mutations were included. Change in communication patterns over time was assessed using McNemar tests. Associations with communication patterns were assessed with multivariable logistic regression. Overall, the proportion of participants encouraged by others significantly (p < .001) increased from before to after genetic counseling. A higher proportion of participants were encouraged by female family members compared with male family members. Participants who were older, had no personal history of cancer, and had a higher cancer risk perception were more likely to be encouraged by others for genetic testing. Participant's intent to encourage family members for genetic testing from before counseling to after receipt of genetic test results decreased by 16.7%. Participants who had no personal history of cancer and had informative test results for a BRCA1/2 mutation were more likely to encourage other family members for genetic testing. In addition, qualitative findings suggested that closeness among family members, concern for family, especially future generations, and cognizance about cancer risk facilitate information sharing and encouragement for genetic testing. Our findings indicate that intrafamilial cancer risk communication varies with the structure of family relationships and that genetic counseling can play an important role in improving intrafamilial cancer risk communication.

How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counselling: a systematic review of research evidence

Supporting consultands to communicate risk information with their relatives is key to obtaining the full benefits of genetic health care. To understand how health-care professionals address this issue in clinical practice and what interventions are used specifically to assist consultands in their communication of genetic information to appropriate relatives, we conducted a systematic review. Four electronic databases and four subject-specific journals were searched for papers published, in English, between January 1997 and May 2014. Of 2926 papers identified initially, 14 papers met the inclusion criteria for the review and were heterogeneous in design, setting and methods. Thematic data analysis has shown that dissemination of information within families is actively encouraged and supported by professionals. Three overarching themes emerged: (1) direct contact from genetic services: sending letters to relatives of mutation carriers; (2) professionals' encouragement of initially reluctant consultands to share relevant information with at-risk relatives and (3) assisting consultands in communicating genetic information to their at-risk relatives, which included as subthemes (i) psychoeducational guidance and (ii) written information aids. Findings suggest that professionals' practice and interventions are predicated on the need to proactively encourage family communication. We discuss this in the context of what guidance of consultands by professionals might be appropriate, as best practices to facilitate family communication, and of the limits to non-directiveness in genetic counselling.

Family Ties: The Role of Family Context in Family Health History Communication About Cancer

Family health history about cancer is an important prevention and health promotion tool. Yet few studies have identified family context factors that promote such discussions. We explored relations among family context (cohesion, flexibility, and openness), self-efficacy, and cancer communication (gathering family history, sharing cancer risk information, and frequency) in a diverse group of women enrolled in a randomized control trial. Baseline survey data for 472 women were analyzed. The women's average age was 34 years, 59% identified as Black, 31% had graduated high school, and 75% reported a family history of any cancer. Results showed that greater family cohesion and flexibility were related to higher communication frequency and sharing cancer information. Women who reported greater self-efficacy were more likely to have gathered family history, shared cancer risk information, and communicated more frequently with relatives. Openness was not associated with communication but was related to greater family cohesion and flexibility. Adjusting for demographic variables, self-efficacy, and family cohesion significantly predicted communication frequency. Women with higher self-efficacy were also more likely to have gathered family health history about cancer and shared cancer risk information. Future research may benefit from considering family organization and self-efficacy when developing psychosocial theories that in turn inform cancer prevention interventions.

What women think: cancer causal attributions in a diverse sample of women

Women hold diverse beliefs about cancer etiology, potentially affecting their use of cancer preventive behaviors. Research has primarily focused on cancer causal attributions survivors and participants from non-diverse backgrounds hold. Less is known about attributions held by women with and without a family history of cancer from a diverse community sample. Participants reported factors they believed cause cancer. Open-ended responses were coded and relations between the top causal attributions and key factors were explored. Findings suggest certain socio-cultural factors play a role in the causal attributions women make about cancer, which can, in turn, inform cancer awareness and prevention messages.

Family communication in a population at risk for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Encouraging family communication is an integral component of genetic counseling; therefore, we sought to identify factors impacting communication to family members at risk for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM). Participants (N = 383) completed an online survey assessing: 1) demographics (gender, genetic test results, HCM family history, and disease severity); 2) illness representations; 3) family functioning and cohesiveness; 4) coping styles; 5) comprehension of HCM autosomal dominant inheritance; and 6) communication of HCM risk information to at-risk relatives. Participants were a national sample of individuals with HCM, recruited through the Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Association. Data from 183 participants were analyzed using a logistic regression analysis, with family communication as a dichotomous dependent variable. We found that female gender and higher comprehension of autosomal dominant inheritance were significant predictors of participants' communication of HCM risk information to all their siblings and children. Our results suggest that utilizing interventions that promote patient comprehension (e.g., a teaching-focused model of genetic counseling) are important and may positively impact family communication within families with HCM.

Preparing individuals to communicate genetic test results to their relatives: report of a randomized control trial

This study reports a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of an intervention to prepare individuals to communicate BRCA1/BRCA2 results to family members. Women aged 18 years and older, who had genetic testing, and who had adult first-degree relatives, were randomly assigned to a communication skills-building intervention or a wellness control session. Primary outcomes were the percentage of probands sharing test results, and the level of distress associated with sharing. The ability of the theory of planned behavior variables to predict the outcomes was explored. Four hundred twenty-two women were enrolled in the study, 219 (intervention) and 203 (control). Data from 137 in the intervention group and 112 in the control group were analyzed. Two hundred forty-nine probands shared test results with 838 relatives (80.1 %). There were no significant differences between study groups in the primary outcomes. Combining data from both arms revealed that perceived control and specific social influence were associated with sharing. Probands were more likely to share genetic test results with their children, female relatives and relatives who they perceived had a favorable opinion about learning the results. The communication skills intervention did not impact sharing of test results. The proband's perception of her relative's opinion of genetic testing and her sense of control in relaying this information influenced sharing. Communication of test results is selective, with male relatives and parents less likely to be informed. Prevalent psychosocial factors play a role in the communication of genetic test results within families.

Experiences of predictive testing in young people at risk of Huntington's disease, familial cardiomyopathy or hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

While debate has focused on whether testing of minors for late onset genetic disorders should be carried out if there is no medical benefit, less is known about the impact on young people (<25 years) who have had predictive testing often many years before the likely onset of symptoms. We looked at the experiences of young people who had had predictive testing for a range of conditions with variable ages at onset and options for screening and treatment. A consecutive series of 61 young people who had a predictive test aged 15-25 years at the Clinical Genetic Service, Manchester, for HD, HBOC (BrCa 1 or 2) or FCM (Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy or Dilated Cardiomyopathy), were invited to participate. Thirty-six (36/61; 59%) agreed to participate (10 HD, 16 HBOC and 10 FCM) and telephone interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. None of the participants expressed regret at having the test at a young age. Participants saw the value of pretest counselling not in facilitating a decision, but rather as a source of information and support. Differences emerged among the three groups in parent/family involvement in the decision to be tested. Parents in FCM families were a strong influence in favour of testing, in HBOC the decision was autonomous but usually congruent with the views of parents, whereas in HD the decision was autonomous and sometimes went against the opinions of parents/grandparents. Participants from all three groups proposed more tailoring of predictive test counselling to the needs of young people.

Are we ready for personalized cancer risk management? The view from breast-care providers

Personalized medicine, the tailoring of prevention and treatment, is the future of routine clinical practice. This approach has started to appear in genetic testing for predisposition to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). We explored how breast-care providers perceived HBOC risk management, using grounded theory. This study found that the frontline healthcare providers perceived HBOC risk management as still being neglected in breast cancer care. Emerging challenges included treatment priority, hesitancy to deal with sensitive issues, easily missed risks, genetic data not being shared among multidisciplinary professionals, and patients being lost to follow-up. Oncology nurses are ideally placed to facilitate communication and utilization of genetic information among multidisciplinary professionals. Specialized outpatient clinics need to be established to follow up individuals at high risk. There is a need to create a system to meet the future demands of personalized medicine in nursing practice.

Intrafamilial disclosure of risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: points to consider

The primary goal of breast and ovarian cancer screening is to minimize the cases of advanced disease and therefore its mortality rate. For hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, one method to reach this goal is to disseminate genetic risk information among family members. However, experience tells us that this information does not always reach family members in a timely manner, if at all. There are many moving parts to a decision to disclose genetic risk information within a family, and the lack of detail and cohesion in current guidelines do a disservice to hereditary breast cancer prevention. Utilizing legal, medical, and policy databases for literature, case law and policy documents relating to communication of genetic test results within families, as well as a consultative process with representative stakeholders, a points to consider has been developed to address a number of issues that might impact the ability and willingness of patients to inform family members of genetic risk. These include: what is "genetic information"; who is the "family"; why should patients inform their family members; and how should health professionals be involved in this process? This represents only an initial step towards fostering better communication within families. Additional research is needed to determine the best methods for encouraging this communication and motivations for disclosing or not and to promote the development of a solution, considering the complexity of human relationships and the probabilistic nature of genetic information.

Exploring resources for intrafamilial communication of cancer genetic risk: we still need to talk

While the importance of intrafamilial communication of hereditary cancer risk has been acknowledged, the factors that promote and act as barriers to patients disclosing their information to their families are complex and emerging. This raises the question: How are patients guided in practice to contemplate intrafamilial communication? Focusing on breast cancer, we conducted an exploratory study examining current resources supporting patients and health-care professionals, and isolated the messages surrounding intrafamilial communication of cancer risk. We find the duty for health-care professionals to counsel patients regarding intrafamilial communication is acknowledged to varying degrees by multiple actors in the cancer care delivery landscape, including health-care professional associations, health service organizations, and patient groups. A range of medical, psychosocial, and other factors underlying intrafamilial communication are acknowledged in messages to patients. Patients, however, are often referred to a single group of health-care professionals to discuss their diverse and complex needs. At the same time, messages aimed at patients appear to place the emphasis on barriers that could exist for patients contemplating intrafamilial communication, while highlighting the benefits families derive from such communication. Taken together, this points to a lack of coherence within materials directed to patients and suggests the need to do coordinated research among stakeholders to address two related issues: (1) determining who are the actors best positioned to send messages surrounding intrafamilial communication to patients and (2) addressing the content of messages conveyed in patient materials.

Families' experience of oncogenetic counselling: accounts from a heterogeneous hereditary cancer risk population

This paper reports the results of semi-structured family interviews conducted with a purposive sample of nine families (comprising 50 individuals) involved in cancer genetic counselling at a Portuguese public hospital. Qualitative analysis resulted in thematic categories illustrating: (1) how families go through cancer genetic counselling (eliciting risk awareness, the motivators, risk management, the psychosocial context of familial engagement in genetic counselling, and the familial pathways of cancer risk tracking); and (2) how families incorporate genetic risk into family life (strategies for family resilience, and the meanings and values that permeate the experience). Families have recognised the value of genetic counselling in enabling participants to take measures to confront disease risk; however, the experience was dominated by distressing feelings. A set of ethical-relational principles guided the experience. Familial experiences on genetic counselling and tracking of cancer susceptibility encompass a sense of trajectory that takes the form of an historical and intergenerational narrative process, linking past, present and possible futures. Such process implies an ongoing set of individual and interactional experiences taking place over time. Specific changes associated with the illness timeline and with individual and family developmental lifespan transitions are thus acknowledged. These results may help genetics healthcare practitioners understand how families perceive, respond to and accommodate cancer risk counselling, and thus illuminate family-oriented tenets for planning and practice.

Talking (or not) about family health history in families of Latino young adults

Although individuals recognize the importance of knowing their family's health history for their own health, relatively few people (e.g., less than a third in one national survey) collect this type of information. This study examines the rates of family communication about family health history of cancer, and predictors of communication in a sample of English-speaking Latino young adults. A total of 224 Latino young adults completed a survey that included measures on family communication, cultural factors, religious commitment, and cancer worry. We found that few Latino young adults reported collecting information from their families for the purposes of creating a family health history (18%) or sharing information about hereditary cancer risk with family members (16%). In contrast, slightly more than half of the participants reported generally "talking with their mothers about their family's health history of cancer." Logistic regression results indicated that cancer worry (odds ratio [OR] = 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-4.93), being female (OR = 3.12; 95% CI = 1.02-8.08), and being older (OR = 1.33; 95% CI = 1.01-1.76) were associated with increased rates of collecting information from family members. In contrast, orientation to the Latino culture (OR = 2.81; 95% CI = 1.33-5.94) and religious commitment (OR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.02-2.32) were associated with increased rates of giving cancer information. Results highlight the need for prevention programs to help further general discussions about a family's history of cancer to more specific information related to family health history.

Life events may contribute to family communication about cancer risk following BRCA1/2 testing

We assessed whether certain life events contributed to the communication about cancer risk within families who have undergone BRCA1/2 testing. We also explored what type of resources participants would have valued to help in supporting family communication about genetic information. Two hundred and forty-six individuals (218 women, 28 men) who received a BRCA1/2 genetic test result 3 to 10 years earlier (mean of 6.4 years) participated in a telephone interview. Participants were asked about the occurrence of a number of life events (cancer diagnosis, death, uptake of prophylactic surgery, and providing care to a family member with cancer) in their family since their BRCA1/2 test result disclosure and, for each occurrence, whether it fostered family communication about cancer risk. A total of 182 participants (74 %) reported that they or one of their relatives received a cancer diagnosis, 176 (72 %) reported that someone died in their family, and 73 (30 %) stated that they or one of their relatives undertook a prophylactic surgery. During this period, 109 participants (44 %) also provided care for a family member who had cancer. Among participants who reported these life events, family communication was fostered by these events in proportions varying from 50 % (death) to 69 % (cancer diagnosis). Our results indicate that life events may contribute to family communication about cancer risk. Further research is needed to determine whether these events provide a "window of opportunity" to reach family members, address their needs and concerns about cancer, update family cancer history, and introduce genetic counseling and risk assessment.

Individual and family characteristics associated with BRCA1/2 genetic testing in high-risk families

BACKGROUND

Little is known about family members' interrelated decisions to seek genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility.

METHODS

The specific aims of this cross-sectional, descriptive, cohort study were (i) to examine whether individual and family characteristics have a direct effect on women's decisions to use genetic testing for hereditary susceptibility to breast cancer and (ii) to explore whether family characteristics moderate the relationships between individual characteristics and the decision to use genetic testing. Participants were women (>18 years old) who (i) received genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer and who agreed to invite one of their female relatives into the study and (ii) female relatives who had NOT obtained genetic testing and were identified by pedigree analysis as having >10% chances of hereditary susceptibility to breast cancer.

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 168 English-speaking, family dyads who completed self-administered, mailed surveys with validated instruments. Multivariate conditional logistic regression analyses showed that the proposed model explained 62% of the variance in genetic testing. The factors most significantly associated with genetic testing were having a personal history of cancer; perceiving genetic testing to have more benefits than barriers; having greater family hardiness; and perceiving fewer negative consequences associated with a breast cancer diagnosis. No significant interaction effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that both individual and family characteristics are associated with the decision to obtain genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer; hence, there is a need for interventions that foster a supportive family environment for patients and their high-risk relatives.

Five skills psychiatrists should have in order to provide patients with optimal ethical care

Analyses of empirical research and ethical problems require different skills and approaches. This article presents five core skills psychiatrists need to be able to address ethical problems optimally. These include their being able to recognize ethical conflicts and distinguish them from empirical questions, apply all morally relevant values, and know good from bad ethical arguments. Clinical examples of each are provided.