Quantifying family dissemination and identifying barriers to communication of risk information in Australian BRCA families

A Cross-sectional Study of Regret in Cancer Patients After Sharing Test Results for Pathogenic Germline Variants of Hereditary Cancers With Relatives

BACKGROUND

Research on whole genome/exome sequencing is increasing worldwide. However, challenges are emerging in relation to receiving germline pathogenic variant results and sharing them with relatives.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence of and reasoning related to regret among patients with cancer who shared single-gene testing results and whole exome sequencing with family members.

METHODS

This was a single-center, cross-sectional study. The Decision Regret Scale was administered, and descriptive questionnaires were used with 21 patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Eight patients were classified as having no regret, 9 patients were classified as having mild regret, and 4 patients were classified as having moderate to strong regret. Reasons patients felt that sharing was the right decision included the following: to allow relatives and children to take preventive measures, the need for both parties to be aware of and ready for the hereditary transmission of cancer, and the need to be able to discuss the situation with others. On the other hand, some patients did not think it was a good decision to share the information because of the associated anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Regret over sharing test results for pathogenic germline variants of hereditary cancers with relatives tended to be low. The main reason was that patients believed that they were able to benefit others by sharing.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Healthcare professionals need to understand the postsharing perceptions and experiences of patients and support them throughout the sharing process.

Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs

Germline genetic sequencing is now at the forefront of cancer treatment and preventative medicine. Cascade genetic testing, or the testing of at-risk relatives, is extremely promising as it offers genetic testing and potentially life-saving risk-reduction strategies to a population exponentially enriched for the risk of carrying a cancer-associated pathogenic variant. However, many relatives do not complete cascade testing due to barriers that span individual, relationship, healthcare community, and societal/policy domains. We have reviewed the published research on cascade testing. Our aim is to evaluate barriers to cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes and explore strategies to mitigate these barriers, with the goal of promoting increased uptake of cascade genetic testing.

Does a proactive procedure lead to a higher uptake of predictive testing in families with a pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 variant? A family cancer clinic evaluation

The uptake of genetic counseling and predictive genetic testing by family members at risk for hereditary tumor syndromes is generally below 50%. To address this issue, a new guideline was introduced in the Netherlands in 2019 that aims to improve the sharing of information within families. In addition to cascade screening supported by follow-up telephone calls with the proband, municipal records were accessed to allow the geneticist to contact at-risk family members directly. We evaluated this procedure in 32 families with a (likely) pathogenic germline BRCA1/BRCA2 variant diagnosed at our hospital between May 1, 2020, and July 31, 2021, comparing current uptake with outcomes achieved for 33 families diagnosed in 2014. Fifteen months after diagnostic testing of the proband, the uptake was 43% (120/277), comparable to the 44% (87/200) registered previously. Among a subgroup of women at 50% risk aged 25-75 years, 71% (47/66) were tested, comparable to an earlier uptake of 69% (59/86). Of the 34 at-risk relatives we contacted directly, 17 (50%) underwent predictive testing. In conclusion, we found no evidence that the new procedure leads to a substantially increased uptake. Future research should be primarily aimed at understanding intrafamilial communication barriers.

Systematic review of the uptake and outcomes from returning secondary findings to adult participants in research genomic testing

The increasing use of genomic sequencing in research means secondary findings (SF) is more frequently detected and becoming a more pressing issue for researchers. This is reflected by the recent publication of multiple guidelines on this issue, calling for researchers to have a plan for managing SF prior to commencing their research. A deeper understanding of participants' experiences and outcomes from receiving SF is needed to ensure that the return of SF is conducted ethically and with adequate support. This review focuses on the uptake and outcomes of receiving actionable SF for research participants. This review included studies from January 2010 to January 2023. Databases searched included Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Of the 3903 studies identified, 29 were included in the analysis. The uptake of SF ranged between 20% and 97%, and outcomes were categorized into psychological, clinical, lifestyle and behavioral, and family outcomes. The results indicate there is minimal psychological impact from receiving SF. Almost all participants greatly valued receiving SF. These findings highlight considerations for researchers when returning results, including the importance of involving genetic health professionals in consenting, results return process, and ensuring continuity of care by engaging healthcare providers.

Systematic evidence review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with cancer genetic counseling

PURPOSE

Genetic counseling (GC) is standard of care in genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). A rigorous assessment of the data reported from published studies is crucial to ensure the evidence-based implementation of GC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 patient-reported and health-services-related outcomes associated with pre- and post-test GC in GCRA in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of 5393 screened articles met inclusion criteria. No articles reporting post-test GC outcomes met inclusion criteria. For patient-reported outcomes, pre-test GC significantly decreased worry, increased knowledge, and decreased perceived risk but did not significantly affect patient anxiety, depression, decisional conflict, satisfaction, or intent to pursue genetic testing. For health-services outcomes, pre-test GC increased correct genetic test ordering, reduced inappropriate services, increased spousal support for genetic testing, and expedited care delivery but did not consistently improve cancer prevention behaviors nor lead to accurate risk assessment. The GRADE certainty in the evidence was very low or low. No included studies elucidated GC effect on mortality, cascade testing, cost-effectiveness, care coordination, shared decision making, or patient time burden.

CONCLUSION

The true impact of GC on relevant outcomes is not known low quality or absent evidence. Although a meta-analysis found that pre-test GC had beneficial effects on knowledge, worry, and risk perception, the certainty of this evidence was low according to GRADE methodology. Further studies are needed to support the evidence-based application of GC in GCRA.

Direct notification by health professionals of relatives at-risk of genetic conditions (with patient consent): views of the Australian public

Genetic risk information for medically actionable conditions has relevance for patients' blood relatives. However, cascade testing uptake in at-risk families is <50%, and the burden of contacting relatives is a significant barrier to dissemination of risk information. Health professionals (HPs) could notify at-risk relatives directly, with patients' consent. This practice is supported by international literature, including strong public support. However, there is little exploration of the Australian public's views about this issue. We surveyed Australian adults using a consumer research company. Respondents were provided a hypothetical scenario and asked about views and preferences regarding direct contact by HPs. 1030 members of the public responded, with median age 45 y and 51% female. The majority would want to be told about genetic risk for conditions that can be prevented/treated early (85%) and contacted directly by a HP (68%). Most preferred a letter that included specific information about the genetic condition in the family (67%) and had no privacy concerns about HPs sending a letter using contact details provided by a relative (85%). A minority (< 5%) had significant privacy concerns, mostly about use of personal contact information. Concerns included ensuring information was not shared with third parties. Almost 50% would prefer that a family member contacted them before the letter was sent, while about half did not prefer this or were unsure. The Australian public supports (and prefers) direct notification of relatives at risk of medically actionable genetic conditions. Guidelines would assist with clarifying clinicians' discretion in this area.

Do people with hereditary cancer syndromes inform their at-risk relatives? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To evaluate rates of familial disclosure of hereditary cancer syndrome information.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO no.: CRD42020134276). Key electronic databases were searched to identify studies evaluating hereditary cancer syndrome cascade relative disclosure. Eligible studies were subjected to meta-analysis.

Results

Thirty-four studies met inclusion criteria. Among 11,711 included relatives, 70% (95% CI 60 - 78%) were informed of their risk of carrying a cancer-associated pathogenic variant; of 2,875 relatives informed of their risk who were evaluated for uptake of cascade testing, 43% (95% CI 27 - 61%) completed testing. Rates of disclosure were higher among female vs male relatives (79% [95% CI 73% - 84%] vs 67% [95% CI 57% - 75%]) and first-degree vs second-degree relatives (83% [95% CI 77% - 88%] vs 58% [95% CI 45 - 69%]).

Conclusion

Nearly one-third of at-risk relatives remain uninformed of their risk of carrying a cancer-associated pathogenic variant. Even among those informed, fewer than half subsequently complete genetic testing, representing a critical missed opportunity for precision cancer prevention.

Innovation

Five studies evaluating interventions to improve disclosure rates were generally ineffective. Urgent work is needed to elucidate barriers to relative disclosure by probands to develop targeted interventions that can optimize proband-mediated cascade genetic testing rates.

Acceptability and Usability of the Family Gene Toolkit for Swiss and Korean Families Harboring BRCA1/BRAC2 Pathogenic Variants: A Web-Based Platform for Cascade Genetic Testing

The study adapted the Family Gene Toolkit and developed a customized web application for Swiss and Korean families harboring BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants to support family communication of genetic testing results and promote cascade genetic testing among at-risk relatives. In the first step, narrative data from 68 women with BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants and clinician feedback informed a culturally sensitive adaptation of the content consistent with current risk management guidelines. In the second step, the Information Technology team developed the functions and the interface of the web application that will host the intervention. In the third step, a new sample of 18 women from families harboring BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants tested the acceptability and usability of the intervention using "think-aloud" interviews and a questionnaire. Participants expressed high levels of satisfaction with the intervention. They provided positive feedback for the information regarding active coping, strategies to enhance family communication, interactive elements, and illustrative stories. They reported that the information was useful and the web application was easy to navigate. Findings suggest that the Family Gene Toolkit is well-designed and can increase rates of cascade testing among at-risk relatives. Its efficacy will be tested in a subsequent randomized trial.

Predictors of the likelihood that patients with rheumatoid arthritis will communicate information about rheumatoid arthritis risk to relatives: A quantitative assessment

First-degree relatives (FDRs) of people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are increasingly recruited to prediction and prevention studies. Access to FDRs is usually via their proband with RA. Quantitative data on predictors of family risk communication are lacking. RA patients completed a questionnaire assessing likelihood of communicating RA risk information to their FDRs, demographic variables, disease impact, illness perceptions, autonomy preferences, interest in FDRs taking a predictive test for RA, dispositional openness, family functioning, and attitudes towards predictive testing. Ordinal regression examined associations between patients' characteristics and their median likelihood of communicating RA risk to FDRs. Questionnaires were completed by 482 patients. The majority (75.1%) were likely/extremely likely to communicate RA risk information to FDRs, especially their children. Decision-making preferences, interest in FDRs taking a predictive test, and beliefs that risk knowledge would increase people's empowerment over their health increased patients' odds of being likely to communicate RA risk information to FDRs. Beliefs that risk information would cause stress to their relatives decreased odds that patients would be likely to communicate RA risk. These findings will inform the development of resources to support family communication about RA risk.

Privacy Implications of Contacting the At-Risk Relatives of Patients with Medically Actionable Genetic Predisposition, with Patient Consent: A Hypothetical Australian Case Study

Genetic risk information has relevance for patients' blood relatives. However, cascade testing uptake in at-risk families is <50%. International research supports direct notification of at-risk relatives by health professionals (HPs), with patient consent. However, HPs express concerns about the privacy implications of this practice. Our privacy analysis, grounded in a clinically relevant hypothetical scenario, considers the types of personal information involved in direct notification of at-risk relatives and the application of Australian privacy regulations. It finds that collecting relatives' contact details, and using those details (with patient consent) to notify relatives of possible genetic risk, does not breach Australian privacy law, providing that HPs adhere to regulatory requirements. It finds the purported "right to know" does not prevent disclosure of genetic information to at-risk relatives. Finally, the analysis confirms that the discretion available to HPs does not equate to a positive duty to warn at-risk relatives. Thus, direct notification of a patient's at-risk relatives regarding medically actionable genetic information, with patient consent, is not a breach of Australian privacy regulations, providing it is conducted in accordance with the applicable principles set out. Clinical services should consider offering this service to patients where appropriate. National guidelines would assist with the clarification of the discretion for HPs.

Evaluating a communication aid for return of genetic results in families with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: A randomized controlled trial

Genetic testing for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is considered a key aspect of management. Communication of genetic test results to the proband and their family members, can be a barrier to effective uptake. We hypothesized that a communication aid would facilitate effective communication, and sought to evaluate knowledge and communication of HCM risk to at-risk relatives. This was a prospective randomized controlled trial. Consecutive HCM patients attending a specialized clinic, who agreed to participate, were randomized to the intervention or current clinical practice. The intervention consisted of a genetic counselor-led appointment, separate to their clinical cardiology review, and guided by a communication booklet which could be written in and taken home. Current clinical practice was defined as the return of the genetic result by a genetic counselor and cardiologist, often as part of a clinical cardiology review. The primary outcome was the ability and confidence of the individual to communicate genetic results to at-risk relatives. The a priori outcome of improved communication among HCM families did not show statistically significant differences between the control and intervention group, though the majority of probands in the intervention group achieved fair communication (n = 13/22) and had higher genetic knowledge scores than those in the control group (7 ± 3 versus 6 ± 3). A total of 29% of at-risk relatives were not informed of a genetic result in their family. Communication among HCM families remains challenging, with nearly a third of at-risk relatives not informed of a genetic result. We show a significant gap in the current approach to supporting family communication about genetics. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617000706370.

Proband-mediated interventions to increase disclosure of genetic risk in families with a BRCA or Lynch syndrome condition: a systematic review

Interventions to assist family communication about inherited cancer risk have the potential to improve family cancer outcomes. This review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of proband-mediated interventions employed within genetics clinics to increase disclosure of genetic risk to at-risk relatives. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PubMed and PsycINFO were searched for publications between 1990-2020. The quality of studies was assessed. From 5605 records reviewed, 9 studies (4 randomised control trials and 5 cohort studies) were included involving families with BRCA1, BRCA2 and Lynch syndrome. Intervention delivery modes included genetic counselling with additional telephone or in-person follow-up, letters, videos, and decision aids. The percentages of at-risk relatives informed by the proband about their risk ranged from 54.0% to 95.5% in the intervention or family-mediated comparison group. Of those who were informed, 24.4-60.0% contacted a genetics clinic and 22.8-76.2% had genetic testing after they were counselled at a genetics clinic. Significant differences between intervention and control group were reported on all three outcomes by one study, and with relatives contacting a genetics clinic by another study. The studies suggest but do not conclusively show, that tailored genetic counselling with additional follow-up can increase both the proportion of informed relatives and relatives who contact the genetics clinic. With the increase in germline testing, interventions are required to consider the family communication process and address post-disclosure variables (e.g., relative's perceptions, emotional reactions) through engagement with probands and relatives to maximise the public health benefit of identifying inherited cancer risk in families.

Cascade Testing for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: Should We Move Toward Direct Relative Contact? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Evidence-based guidelines recommend cascade genetic counseling and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes, providing relatives the opportunity for early detection and prevention of cancer. The current standard is for patients to contact and encourage relatives (patient-mediated contact) to undergo counseling and testing. Direct relative contact by the medical team or testing laboratory has shown promise but is complicated by privacy laws and lack of infrastructure. We sought to compare outcomes associated with patient-mediated and direct relative contact for hereditary cancer cascade genetic counseling and testing in the first meta-analysis on this topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO No.: CRD42020134276). We searched key electronic databases to identify studies evaluating hereditary cancer cascade testing. Eligible trials were subjected to meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Among relatives included in the meta-analysis, 48% (95% CI, 38 to 58) underwent cascade genetic counseling and 41% (95% CI, 34 to 48) cascade genetic testing. Compared with the patient-mediated approach, direct relative contact resulted in significantly higher uptake of genetic counseling for all relatives (63% [95% CI, 49 to 75] v 35% [95% CI, 24 to 48]) and genetic testing for first-degree relatives (62% [95% CI, 49 to 73] v 40% [95% CI, 32 to 48]). Methods of direct contact included telephone calls, letters, and e-mails; respective rates of genetic testing completion were 61% (95% CI, 51 to 70), 48% (95% CI, 37 to 59), and 48% (95% CI, 45 to 50).

CONCLUSION

Most relatives at risk for hereditary cancer do not undergo cascade genetic counseling and testing, forgoing potentially life-saving medical interventions. Compared with patient-mediated contact, direct relative contact increased rates of cascade genetic counseling and testing, arguing for a shift in the care delivery paradigm, to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.

Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Variation Outcomes for Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer-Related Mutations in a Ten-Year Cohort From Neiva, Huila, Colombia

Background Some breast cancer cases are related to inherited mutations, and this is the reason why early mutation screening is emerging as an area of focus for cost-effective care. However, breast cancer-related mutations vary according to race, ethnicity, geographic origin, and healthcare access. Surveillance for familial breast cancer is not performed routinely in Colombia. Our main aim in this study was to describe a cohort of breast cancer patients, carrying founder breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutations, which were followed up for up to 10 years (2010-2019) in Neiva, Colombia. Methods We performed a retrospective description from an outpatient care center in Huila, Colombia, a region with high breast cancer rates. This study included patients with both a breast cancer diagnosis and an incident genetic mutation for breast cancer (detected during a breast cancer consultation). We captured information from patient medical records. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results A total of 105 patients met the study's inclusion criteria and were included patients with the BRCA1 mutation and three with BRCA2 mutations. They had a median age of 45 years (IQR, 36 to 51 years). Relatives with a breast cancer history were found in 74 carriers (70.5%). Most patients had a report of Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) ≥ 4. A TNM (tumor, node, metastasis) changed reclassification was observed in anatomical vs. prognostic classification. Median follow-up was of 74 months (IQR, 44 to 130), overall observed mortality was 22.9%, and specific mortality was 19.1%. Conclusion Women with breast cancer who carry a mutation related to breast cancer are usually younger than age 50 at diagnosis. Developing strategies and specific policies for this population is needed, and a prevalent BRCA1 c.3331_3334delCAAG mutation could be used as a cost-effective first approach. Among these patients, a risk-increased reclassification was observed.

BRCAShare —Assessment of an animated digital message for intrafamilial communication of pathogenic variant positive test results: A feasibility study

While genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) is well-established in the field of medicine, family members' uptake of cascade genetic testing for known familial pathogenic variants remains low. Probands often become responsible for initiating familial communication about their testing results, and barriers to communication may include difficulty in conveying information to relatives and a lack of communication resources for probands' use. In this study, we tested a two-minute animated digital message (ADM) intervention guided by the Health Belief Model (HBM) in an unselected sample to determine hypothetical individual perceptions of susceptibility and severity and behavioral intention to act on the information provided in the ADM. We recruited genetic testing naïve adults from the United States with no personal history of cancer through Amazon Mechanical Turk to participate in this study. Participants were presented a hypothetical scenario describing a relative's recent HBOC diagnosis, viewed the ADM, and answered a questionnaire assessing participants' perception of the HBM constructs in relation to the hypothetical scenario and participants' intentions to pursue cascade genetic testing, talk to a healthcare professional, or talk to family members after ADM viewing. Participants (n = 373) largely perceived HBOC as serious and believed that they could benefit from the information provided by genetic testing; 76% hypothetically intended to pursue genetic testing at a cost of $100 or less, and 90% intended to either pursue testing or talk to a healthcare provider or family members. This feasibility study in an unaffected population could mimic the experience of distant/less-engaged relatives in HBOC families after receiving unexpected information about cascade genetic testing. Most participants demonstrated behavioral intention toward cascade testing, at a rate higher than literature would suggest is typical in high-risk families, indicating that a theory-supported, simple to use intervention may be useful in clinical practice.

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.

Intention to Inform Relatives, Rates of Cascade Testing, and Preference for Patient-Mediated Communication in Families Concerned with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndrome: The Swiss CASCADE Cohort

Cascade screening for Tier 1 cancer genetic conditions is a significant public health intervention because it identifies untested relatives of individuals known to carry pathogenic variants associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch syndrome (LS). The Swiss CASCADE is a family-based, open-ended cohort, including carriers of HBOC- and LS-associated pathogenic variants and their relatives. This paper describes rates of cascade screening in relatives from HBOC- and LS- harboring families, examines carriers' preferences for communication of testing results, and describes theory-based predictors of intention to invite relatives to a cascade screening program. Information has been provided by 304 index cases and 115 relatives recruited from September 2017 to December 2021. On average, 10 relatives per index case were potentially eligible for cascade screening. Approximately 65% of respondents wanted to invite relatives to the cohort, and approximately 50% indicated a preference for patient-mediated communication of testing results, possibly with the assistance of digital technology. Intention to invite relatives was higher for first- compared to second- and third-degree relatives, but was not different between syndromes or based on relatives' gender. The family environment and carrying pathogenic variants predicts intention to invite relatives. Information helps optimize delivery of tailored genetic services.

Barriers to family history knowledge and family communication among LGBTQ+ individuals in the context of hereditary cancer risk assessment

Openness about identity as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual orientations and gender identities (LGBTQ+) may cause strain on relationships between family members, which could lead to limited knowledge of cancer family history and reduced communication with family members. As a result, members of the LGBTQ+ community may have more difficulty accessing genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk. We applied a mixed-methods approach to explore potential barriers to knowledge of cancer family history and family communication among participants of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study who self-identified as LGBTQ+. We assessed perceptions of family functioning and communication of genetic test results to family members using survey tools and supplemented these data with 20 in-depth interviews to further assess participant perspectives and experiences. LGBTQ+ participants were more likely to report unhealthy family functioning on the survey tool, and some interviewees endorsed that openness about their LGBTQ+ identity led to strained family relationships and reduced communication about their family history of cancer. Overall, this study identified barriers that may be faced by members of the LGBTQ+ community which could limit their ability to access genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk.

Family Adjustment to Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: A Systematic Review

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

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.

Communication processes about predictive genetic testing within high-risk breast cancer families: a two-phase study design

The detection of a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene has medical and psychological consequences for both, affected mutation carriers and their relatives. A two-phase study with explanatory sequential mixed methods design examined the psychological impact of genetic testing and associated family communication processes. Analyzing a survey data of 79 carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, the majority had general psychological distress independent of cancer diagnosis in the patients' history. The point prevalence of depression was 16.9%. Contrary to their subjective perception, the respondents' knowledge about those mutations was moderate. Despite the high rate of information transfer to relatives at risk (100%), their reported uptake of genetic testing was low (45.6%). Communication about the mutation detection was more frequent with female than with male relatives. In-depth focus group interviews revealed significant barriers to accessing genetic counseling including anxiety, uncertainty about the benefits of testing and about the own cancer risk, particularly among males. This study suggests that an adequate knowledge of the genetic background and psychological support is required to reduce emotional distress, to support familial communication and to facilitate genetic testing.

Coping response and family communication of cancer risk in men harboring a BRCA mutation: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

Providing genetic counseling and genetic testing to at-risk blood relatives (cascade screening) is important for improving BRCA cancer outcomes. Intra-familial communication of risk is critical for cascade screening efforts yet relatively little is known about men's role in communicating BRCA risk. We sought to examine men's coping response to their BRCA status and intra-familial communication of risk to inform the development of tailored interventions that could promote cascade screening.

METHODS

We employed a sequential mixed-methods design. First, we measured coping response (quantitative) using the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA). MICRA scores were compared between BRCA+ men, BRCA- men and BRCA+ women. Subsequently, we used template analysis to analyze qualitative interviews exploring coping and intra-familial communication of risk. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) served as a guiding framework for identifying intervention targets.

RESULTS

BRCA+ men (n = 36) had significantly higher levels of distress (p < 0.001), uncertainty (p < 0.001) and negative experiences (p < 0.05) compared to BRCA- male counterparts (n = 23). BRCA+ men had significantly lower distress (p < 0.001) and uncertainty (p < 0.001) than BRCA+ women (n = 406). Qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with BRCA+ men (n = 35) identified promoters and barriers to active coping response and intra-familial communication of risk. Mapping results onto the TPB identified targets for tailoring person-centered approaches for men addressing beliefs/attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control.

CONCLUSIONS

Men and women appear to have different coping responses to learning their BRCA status. Developing tailored (sex-based), theory informed interventions may help promote intra-familial communication of BRCA risk and support cascade screening.

Sharing genetic test results of germline pathogenic variants of hereditary cancer with relatives: A single-center cross-sectional study

Objective

This study aimed to determine whether Japanese cancer patients share test results of germline pathogenic variants of hereditary cancer with their relatives.

Methods

This single-center cross-sectional study enrolled 21 Japanese patients who received results of germline pathogenic variants of hereditary cancer at least 6 months prior.

Results

All patients shared their test results with at least one relative, with the following sharing rates: 85.7% for first-degree relatives, 10% for second-degree relatives and 8.3% for third-degree relatives. Patients most commonly shared the information with their children aged >18 years (86.7%), followed by their siblings (73.6%), spouses (64.7%) and parents (54.5%). Three categories were extracted from qualitative analysis: ‘characteristics of my cancer’, ‘knowledge and caution about inheritability’ and ‘utilization of medical care.’

Conclusions

The rate of test result sharing with first-degree relatives was comparable with those in Europe and the USA. Patients with germline pathogenic variants also tended to share their test results more with their children and siblings than with their parents. Informing their relatives of the results was suggestive of the motivation to influence their relatives’ health outcome and contribute to the well-being of their children and siblings.

Communication about positive BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results and uptake of testing in relatives in a diverse Asian setting

The vast majority of studies assessing communication of BRCA1/2 results with relatives and family uptake of BRCA1/2 testing have been conducted in Western societies, and a dearth of studies have been conducted in Asia among relatives of diverse carriers of pathogenic BRCA1/2 germline variants. This study aimed to present rates of BRCA1/2 result disclosure by probands and probands' motivators and barriers of family communication and predictive testing uptake among eligible relatives. It also examined patterns of disclosure and testing uptake among different types of relatives. Eighty-seven carriers with either breast or ovarian cancer, who had previously been found to be carriers of a pathogenic variant in BRCA1/2, were interviewed over the phone using a semi-structured interview guide. Fifty-six percent of patients were Chinese, 21% were Indian, and 23% were Malay. It was found that 62.0% of eligible first- and second-degree relatives were informed by the proband about the testing result and that 11.5% of eligible first- and second-degree relatives had genetic testing. First-degree relatives were more likely to have been informed and tested compared to second-degree relatives, as were sisters compared to brothers. The low rates of family communication and testing uptake documented in this study suggest that interventions should focus on encouraging probands to inform male and second-degree relatives and targeting such relatives to increase informed decisions and accessibility to testing. Promotion strategies should be culturally sensitive to optimize outcomes.

Sharing genetic test results with family members of BRCA, PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM carriers

OBJECTIVE

This study explored motivators and challenges/barriers to sharing personal genetic test results (GTR) with family members (FM).

METHODS

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 62 women who had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in aBRCA, PALB2, CHEK2, or ATM gene. Selective qualitative data analysis focused on eliciting motivators and challenges/barriers identified by participants when sharing their GTR with FM.

RESULTS

Motivators to sharing personal GTR with FM included: health protection and prevention; moral obligation; decisional empowerment; familial ties; written resources; and contextualization for a familial cause for cancer. Challenges/barriers to family sharing included: concern for FM reactions; complexities of information; lack of closeness; perceived relevance; and emotional impact.

CONCLUSIONS

All motivators and challenges/barriers were identified across BRCA and non-BRCA carriers, demonstrating commonalities in family sharing of GTR among high- to moderate-penetrance hereditary BC (breast cancer) genes. Despite challenges/barriers, participants disclosed their GTR with most close FM, yet restrictions in communication and/or strain on the timing, manner of disclosing, and strategies used varied across certain FM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings offer healthcare providers and researchers preliminary practical implications for broadly improving family sharing interventions across P/LP variants in BC risk genes by demonstrating important elements to include in family sharing letters.

Examining the uptake of predictive BRCA testing in the UK; findings and implications

Predictive BRCA testing is offered to asymptomatic individuals to predict future risk where a variant has been identified in a relative. It is uncertain whether all eligible relatives access testing, and whether this is related to health care inequalities. Our aim was to analyse trends and inequalities in uptake of testing, and identify predictors of testing and time-to-receipt of testing. A database from April 2010 to March 2017 was collated. Multivariate analysis explored individual associations with testing. Predictor variables included gender, BRCA test type, cancer history, Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) and education status. To evaluate factors associated with time-to-testing, a Cox proportional-hazards (CP) model was used. Of 779 tests undertaken, 336 (43.1%) were identified with a BRCA variant. A total of 537 (68.9%) were female and in 83.4% (387/464) of probands, predictive testing was received by relatives. Analysis identified inequalities since decreased testing was found when the proband was unaffected by cancer (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.33). Median time-to-testing was 390 days (range, 0-7090 days) and the CP model also identified inequalities in the hazard ratio (HR) for testing for people aged >40 was higher than for aged <40 (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.20-1.67) and BRCA2 testing was higher than for BRCA1 testing (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.18-1.64). Reduced testing was found when probands were unaffected by cancer and time-to-testing was found to vary by age and BRCA1/2 test. Given limited study sample size, further research is recommended to examine inequalities in predictive BRCA testing.

Aligning intuition and theory: enhancing the replicability of behaviour change interventions in cancer genetics

Background

Despite considerable encouragement for healthcare professionals to use or be clear about the theory used in their improvement programmes, the uptake of these approaches to design interventions or report their content is lacking. Recommendations suggest healthcare practitioners work with social and/or behavioural scientists to gain expertise in programme theory, ideally before, but even during or after the work is done. We aim to demonstrate the extent to which intuitive intervention strategies designed by healthcare professionals to overcome patient barriers to communicating genetic cancer risk information to family members align with a theoretical framework of behaviour change.

Methods

As part of a pre-post intervention study, a team of genetic counsellors aimed to understand, and design interventions to overcome, the major barriers a group of familial cancer patients face around communicating hereditary cancer risk information to their relatives. A behavioural change specialist worked with the team to review and recode barriers and interventions according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and 93 behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Resulting BCTs were cross-referenced against the Theory and Techniques Tool to examine whether evidence-based mechanistic links have been established to date.

Results

Five themes emerged from the genetic counsellor coded barriers, which when recoded according to the TDF represented seven domains of behaviour change. Forty-five experiential and intuitive interventions were used to tackle key barriers. These were represented by 21 BCTs, which were found to be used on 131 occasions. The full mapping exercise is presented, resulting in a suite of intervention strategies explicitly linked to a theoretical framework. Structured, written reflections were provided retrospectively by the core clinical team.

Conclusions

Although the ideal is to use theory prospectively, or even whilst a project is underway, making links between theory and interventions explicit, even retrospectively, can contribute towards standardising intervention strategies, furthering understanding of intervention effects, and enhancing the opportunities for accurate replicability and generalisability across other settings. Demonstrating to healthcare professionals how their intuition aligns with theory may highlight the additional benefits that theory has to offer and serve to promote its use in improvement.

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.

Social media usage in family communication about genetic information: 'I no longer speak with my sister but she needed to know'

The use of social media has become a ubiquitous form of communication. Little is known about whether social media is used in families to assist with the communication of genetic information. This study aimed to understand if and why individuals use social media to communicate genetic information to at-risk relatives. Individuals with either a pathogenic variant in a cancer-predisposing gene or a heterozygous pathogenic variant in an autosomal or X-linked recessive gene were surveyed about communicating genetic information to their at-risk relatives and their use of social media to assist this process. Surveys were sent to 323 individuals from a reproductive carrier screening program and 250 individuals from a familial cancer center. The 128 responses (response rate 25.2%) showed that while most participants (79.0%) did not use social media to communicate genetic information, those that did use social media (21.0%) found it to be helpful as it was easy, accessible and allowed individuals to overcome communication barriers. Genetic professionals should be aware that social media is being used by individuals to assist family communication about genetic information and should discuss this method of communication with individuals who are faced with communicating genetic information with their family.

When to break the news and whose responsibility is it? A cross-sectional qualitative study of health professionals' views regarding disclosure of BRCA genetic cancer risk

OBJECTIVES

Disclosure of a hereditary condition in the family poses notable challenges for patients who often seek the assistance of genetic health professionals (GHPs). This study aimed to investigate GHPs' opinions about the ideal time for disclosure to offspring and their responsibility to at-risk relatives.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional qualitative study.

SETTING

Genetic familial cancer clinics related to mostly secondary and tertiary care hospitals and centres in urban, regional and rural areas across all states of Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

GHPs (N=73) including clinical geneticists, genetic counsellors, medical specialists, nurses, surgeons and mental health specialists (eg, psychiatrists, psychologists) who had worked with BRCA1 and BRCA2 families for an average of 9 years.

RESULTS

Focus groups and interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically. GHPs perceived that life stage, maturity, parents' knowledge and capacity to disseminate information influenced parent-offspring disclosure. In general, GHPs recommended early informal conversations with offspring about a family illness. GHPs considered that facilitation of disclosure to relatives using counselling strategies was their responsibility, yet there were limitations to their role (eg, legal and resource constraints). Variability exists in the extent to which genetic clinics overcome challenges to disclosure.

CONCLUSIONS

GHPs' views on the ideal time for the disclosure of genetic risk are generally dependent on the patient's age and relative's ability to disclose information. A responsibility towards the patient and their at-risk relative was widely accepted as a role of a GHP but views vary depending on legislative and specialty differences. Greater uniformity is needed in genetic procedural guidelines and the role of each discipline (eg, geneticists, genetic counsellors, oncologists, nurses and mental health specialists) in genetic clinics to manage disclosure challenges.

Predictive Testing for Tumor Predisposition Syndromes in Pediatric Relatives: An Asian Experience

Approximately 10% of pediatric cancer patients possess germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV/LPV) in known tumor predisposition genes. Predictive testing is the optimal approach to identify asymptomatic at-risk relatives to guide gene-directed surveillance for early cancer detection and/or risk-reducing strategies. However, the uptake rate for predictive testing remains low in Asian countries. We aim to evaluate the uptake rate of predictive testing in a pediatric population (aged under 21-years-old) in a multi-ethnic Asian cancer center. Our retrospective analysis included families with PV/LPVs identified in genes associated with pediatric tumor predisposition. Of the 83 pediatric first-degree relatives (FDRs) from 49 unrelated families, 20 FDRs (24.1%) originating from 13 families (26.6%) underwent predictive testing. Genes tested in pediatric FDRs were APC, RB1, SBDS, SDHA, SDHB, SDHD, and TP53. All pediatric FDRs of probands with PV/LPVs in RB1 and biallelic PVs in SBDS underwent predictive testing, while <45% of pediatric FDRs had predictive testing for familial PV/LPVs identified in the APC, SDHA, SDHB, SDHD, and TP53 genes. Amongst the 13 families who underwent pre-test counseling, 80% of pediatric FDRs in these families proceeded with predictive testing. Malay pediatric FDRs and siblings of probands were more likely to undergo predictive testing. We conclude that the predictive testing rate in pediatric FDRs is higher than that of adult FDRs in Asia, but still below the global average. We postulate factors that may influence predictive testing uptake in pediatric FDRs includes a lack of genetics awareness, concerns regarding insurance, and genetic discrimination.

Impact of free cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing on uptake in Singapore

Cascade testing for cancer predisposition offers a highly efficient and cost-effective method for identifying individuals at increased risk for cancer, in whom targeted interventions can often improve survival. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of free cascade testing on uptake and identify other associated factors. Demographic and clinical data were gathered prospectively for 183 probands found to have a pathogenic variant associated with cancer predisposition and their 826 first-degree relatives (FDRs). The provision of free cascade testing was significantly associated with uptake (21.6% vs 6.1%; χ ², P < 0.001). Relationship type between FDR and proband and FDR age also demonstrated significant associations, suggesting greater engagement amongst younger generations. Overall, 29.0% (53/183) of families had at least 1 FDR who underwent cascade testing. Of these families, 67.9% (36/53) had an uptake rate of at least 40.0%. Cost is a significant barrier to cascade testing uptake in Singapore. Tailored interventions targeting underrepresented groups and genetic counseling approaches supporting family communication and decision-making are necessary.

Family communication following a diagnosis of myotonic dystrophy: To tell or not to tell?

Family communication about genetic information enables informed medical and reproductive decision-making. The literature suggests that a significant proportion of genetically at-risk family members remain uninformed about genetic risk information as a result of non-disclosure. This study explored the experiences of New Zealand families communicating about a diagnosis of type 1 myotonic dystrophy (DM1). Eligible individuals were identified and recruited from the New Zealand (NZ) MD Prev study, a nationwide study which aimed to determine the prevalence, impact, and costs of genetic muscle disorders across the lifespan. Twelve qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 participants. The findings demonstrate diversity among and within families, with several distinct family narratives described. Most participants reported a motivation to tell relatives about their diagnosis to promote autonomy. Women were pivotal throughout communication processes and this was often tied to the concept of maternal responsibility and a desire to promote relatives' reproductive autonomy. The diagnosis of DM1 and the subsequent family communication decisions altered relationships for many, with both positive and negative impacts described. The findings demonstrate that individuals require time to explore the impact of a diagnosis of DM1 on self, family and intimate partner relationships to anticipate unique communication challenges. Genetic counselors can use these findings to inform their approach to counseling families with DM1. Longitudinal genetic counseling may be beneficial as a way to provide individuals with life stage specific support as they communicate with their relatives about a diagnosis of DM1.

The uptake of presymptomatic genetic testing in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome: a systematic review of the literature and implications for clinical practice

Following the identification in a proband of a germline BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) or a DNA mismatch repair gene mutation in Lynch syndrome (LS) he or she will be asked to inform at-risk family members about the option for presymptomatic DNA testing. However, in clinical practice multiple factors may complicate the process of information sharing. We critically evaluated studies on the uptake of presymptomatic genetic testing in both syndromes. A search of relevant MeSH terms and key words in PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO yielded 795 articles published between 2001 and 2017. Thirty of these publications included outcome measures relevant for the current study. Based on information provided by the proband (15 studies) the uptake of presymptomatic genetic testing ranged from 15 to 57% in HBOC, while one study in LS kindreds reported an uptake of 70%. Based on information provided by genetics centres (the remaining 15 studies) the uptake ranged from 21 to 44% in HBOC and from 41 to 94% in LS. However, when genetics centres contacted relatives directly a substantial number of additional family members could be tested. Proband-mediated provision of information to at-risk relatives is a standard procedure in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome. However, the resulting uptake of presymptomatic testing is disappointing-an issue that is now urgent due to the increased use of genetic testing in clinical oncology. We propose that additional strategies should be introduced including the geneticist directly contacting relatives. The outcomes of these strategies should be carefully monitored and evaluated.

Evaluating a custom-designed aid to improve communication of genetic results in families with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Genetic testing for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in the era of genomics brings unique challenges for genetic counselling. The number of genes routinely included in an HCM gene panel has increased markedly, many with minimal if any robust evidence of gene-disease association. Subsequently, there is a greater chance of uncertain genetic findings. The responsibility of communicating this information with at-risk relatives lies with the index case (proband). We have developed a communication aid to assist with the delivery of genetic results to the proband. We have previously shown the aid is feasible and acceptable and have now developed a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a genetic counsellor-led intervention incorporating the communication aid.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective randomised controlled trial. We will investigate the impact of a genetic counsellor-led intervention to return proband genetic results using a custom-designed communication aid. We aim to improve knowledge and empowerment. The primary outcome of this trial is the ability and confidence of the proband to communicate genetic results to at-risk relatives. Secondary outcomes will assess genetic knowledge, satisfaction with services, outcomes from genetic counselling and psychological adaptation to genetic information.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by and is in strict accordance with the Sydney Local Health District Ethics Review Committee (X16-0030; 22/01/2016; version 1). Results from this trial will be prepared as a manuscript and submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication as well as submission for presentation at national and international meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12617000706370.

Pathogenic Variants in Less Familiar Cancer Susceptibility Genes: What Happens After Genetic Testing?

Purpose

As genetic testing expands, patients are increasingly found to carry pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes that are less familiar to most clinicians, specifically genes other than those causing hereditary breast ovarian cancer syndrome ( BRCA1 and BRCA2) and Lynch syndrome. Little is known about the subsequent behaviors of such patients in terms of managing cancer risks and informing relatives.

Methods

All adult patients who were counseled and tested at the Stanford Cancer Genetics Clinic from January 2013 to July 2015 and had a pathogenic variant in a non- BRCA1/2, non–Lynch syndrome gene were invited to participate in a telephone interview about adherence to risk-reducing recommendations, genetic testing by relatives, and new cancer incidence.

Results

Fifty-seven (40%) of 142 eligible patients were successfully contacted, and all 57 patients participated; median follow-up was 677 days (range, 247 to 1,401 days). Most patients (82%; 95% CI, 70% to 90%) recalled that a risk-reducing intervention (screening, medication, or surgery) was recommended, and most patients (85%; 95% CI, 72% to 93%) adhered to the recommendation. Nearly all patients (91%; 95% CI, 81% to 97%) shared results with relatives, and most patients (78%; 95% CI, 64% to 88%) reported that a relative was subsequently tested. During the follow-up period, 9% of patients (95% CI, 3% to 19%) developed second cancers, and in 14% of patients (95% CI, 7% to 26%), a first-degree relative developed cancer, some of which were detected by recommended screening.

Conclusion

Patients with a pathogenic variant in a less familiar cancer susceptibility gene report high adherence to risk-reducing interventions. Furthermore, in the 57 carriers and subsequently tested relatives with two years of follow-up, a total of three cancers (one in a proband and two in relatives) were detected through interventions recommended on the basis of the pathogenic variant. These results suggest a potential benefit of genetic counseling and testing for pathogenic variants in less familiar genes.