Family communication matters: the impact of telling relatives about unclassified variants and uninformative DNA-test results

The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes

A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) is a difference in the DNA sequence with uncertain consequences for gene function. A VUS in a hereditary cancer gene should not change medical care, yet some patients undergo medical procedures based on their VUS result, highlighting the unmet educational needs among patients and healthcare providers. To address this need, we developed, evaluated, and refined novel educational materials to explain that while VUS results do not change medical care, it remains important to share any personal or family history of cancer with family members given that their personal and family medical history can guide their cancer risk management. We began by reviewing the prior literature and transcripts from interviews with six individuals with a VUS result to identify content and design considerations to incorporate into educational materials. We then gathered feedback to improve materials via a focus group of multidisciplinary experts and multiple rounds of semi-structured interviews with individuals with a VUS result. Themes for how to improve content, visuals, and usefulness were used to refine the materials. In the final round of interviews with an additional 10 individuals with a VUS result, materials were described as relatable, useful, factual, and easy to navigate, and also increased their understanding of cancer gene VUS results.

Clinical implications of VUS reclassification in a single-centre series from application of ACMG/AMP classification rules specified for BRCA1/2

BACKGROUND

BRCA1/2 testing is crucial to guide clinical decisions in patients with hereditary breast/ovarian cancer, but detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) prevents proper management of carriers. The ENIGMA (Evidence-based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles) BRCA1/2 Variant Curation Expert Panel (VCEP) has recently developed BRCA1/2 variant classification guidelines consistent with ClinGen processes, specified against the ACMG/AMP (American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular-Pathology) classification framework.

METHODS

The ClinGen-approved BRCA1/2-specified ACMG/AMP classification guidelines were applied to BRCA1/2 VUSs identified from 2011 to 2022 in a series of patients, retrieving information from the VCEP documentation, public databases, literature and ENIGMA unpublished data. Then, we critically re-evaluated carrier families based on new results and checked consistency of updated classification with main sources for clinical interpretation of BRCA1/2 variants.

RESULTS

Among 166 VUSs detected in 231 index cases, 135 (81.3%) found in 197 index cases were classified by applying BRCA1/2-specified ACMG/AMP criteria: 128 (94.8%) as Benign/Likely Benign and 7 (5.2%) as Pathogenic/Likely Pathogenic. The average time from the first report as 'VUS' to classification using this approach was 49.4 months. Considering that 15 of these variants found in 64 families had already been internally reclassified prior to this work, this study provided 121 new reclassifications among the 151 (80.1%) remaining VUSs, relevant to 133/167 (79.6%) families.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrated the effectiveness of new BRCA1/2 ACMG/AMP classification guidelines for VUS classification within a clinical cohort, and their important clinical impact. Furthermore, they suggested a cadence of no more than 3 years for regular review of VUSs, which however requires time, expertise and resources.

Decision-making about genetic health information among family dyads: a systematic literature review

Decisions involving two individuals (i.e., dyadic decision-making) have been increasingly studied in healthcare research. There is evidence of bi-directional influences in decision-making processes among spousal, provider-patient and parent-child dyads. Genetic information can directly impact biologically related individuals. Thus, it is important to understand dyadic decision-making about genetic health information among family members. This systematic literature review aimed to identify literature examining decision-making among family dyads. Peer-reviewed publications were included if they reported quantitative empirical research on dyadic decision-making about genetic information, published between January 1998 and August 2020 and written in English. The search was conducted in 6 databases and returned 3167 articles, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were in the context of cancer genetic testing (n = 8) or reproductive testing or screening (n = 5). Studies reported two broad categories of decisions with dyadic influence: undergoing screening or testing (n = 10) and sharing information with family (n = 5). Factors were correlated between dyads such as attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and psychological wellbeing. Emerging evidence shows that dyad members influence each other when making decisions about receiving or sharing genetic information. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering both members of a dyad in intervention design and clinical interactions.

Exploring relatives' perceptions of participation, ethics, and communication in a patient-driven study for hereditary cancer variant reclassification

Effective communication of genetic information within families depends on several factors. Few studies explore intra-familial communication of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) results or active collaboration between family members to classify VUS. Our qualitative study aimed to describe the experiences of individuals asked by family members to participate in the FindMyVariant study, a patient-driven family study which aimed to reclassify a clinically identified familial VUS in a hereditary cancer gene. We collected feedback from 56 individuals from 21 different families through phone interviews and written correspondence, transcribed the interviews, and performed thematic analysis on all text. We describe themes from three main topics: participation, ethical considerations, and study impacts. Participation in the FindMyVariant study, defined as returning a sample for targeted genotyping, was motivated by convenience and a desire to help the family, oneself, and science. Relatives were generally responsive to invitations to participate in FindMyVariant from another family member. Those who declined to participate did so due to concerns about research program confidentiality rather than family dynamics. No major ethical issues arose in response to the patient-driven study structure, and no major changes in stress and anxiety, medical care, or behavior occurred. Participation in patient-driven familial VUS classification studies has a neutral or positive impact on family health communication. While it is important to design studies to minimize familial coercion, intra-familial confidentiality breaches, and misinterpretation of genetic results, these were not major concerns among relatives in this study. Clinicians and laboratories may consider encouraging familial communication about genetic variants using family members as liaisons.

Understanding variants of uncertain significance in the era of multigene panels: Through the eyes of the patient

Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) are often disclosed to patients despite ambiguous association with disease risk and lack of clinical actionability. It is important to understand how patients understand a VUS result, but few studies have assessed this. Our qualitative study explored patient recall, reaction to, and interpretation of a VUS in the context of multigene panels. We conducted 11 semi-structured phone interviews with adults who had a VUS identified on multigene panel testing in a hereditary oncology clinic, with questions focusing on the VUS result, personal and family history, and motivations for and expectations of genetic testing. Transcripts were coded iteratively, using both deductive and inductive codes. Overall, participants usually recalled that they had a VUS, despite variation in the vocabulary used. Participants responded both emotionally and intellectually to receiving information about having a VUS, which was often a result of their expectations and motivations prior to testing. Overall, participants understood the lack of clinical significance of a VUS, yet often interpreted the etiologic significance of a VUS within the context of the personal and family history. Our study provides insight into a process by which patients translate uncertain genetic testing results into a construct that fits within their current belief framework and which may be facilitated by a genetic counselor.

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.

Ethics in genetic counselling

Difficult ethical issues arise for patients and professionals in medical genetics, and often relate to the patient's family or their social context. Tackling these issues requires sensitivity to nuances of communication and a commitment to clarity and consistency. It also benefits from an awareness of different approaches to ethical theory. Many of the ethical problems encountered in genetics relate to tensions between the wishes or interests of different people, sometimes even people who do not (yet) exist or exist as embryos, either in an established pregnancy or in vitro. Concern for the long-term welfare of a child or young person, or possible future children, or for other members of the family, may lead to tensions felt by the patient (client) in genetic counselling. Differences in perspective may also arise between the patient and professional when the latter recommends disclosure of information to relatives and the patient finds that too difficult, or when the professional considers the genetic testing of a child, sought by parents, to be inappropriate. The expectations of a patient's community may also lead to the differences in perspective between patient and counsellor. Recent developments of genetic technology permit genome-wide investigations. These have generated additional and more complex data that amplify and exacerbate some pre-existing ethical problems, including those presented by incidental (additional sought and secondary) findings and the recognition of variants currently of uncertain significance, so that reports of genomic investigations may often be provisional rather than definitive. Experience is being gained with these problems but substantial challenges are likely to persist in the long term.

Dealing With BRCA1/2 Unclassified Variants in a Cancer Genetics Clinic: Does Cosegregation Analysis Help?

Background: Detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes poses relevant challenges for counseling and managing patients. VUS carriers should be managed similarly to probands with no BRCA1/2 variants detected, and predictive genetic testing in relatives is discouraged. However, miscomprehension of VUSs is common and can lead to inaccurate risk perception and biased decisions about prophylactic surgery. Therefore, efforts are needed to improve VUS evaluation and communication at an individual level.

Aims: We aimed at investigating whether cosegregation analysis, integrated with a careful review of available functional data and in silico predictions, may improve VUSs interpretation and counseling in individual families.

Methods: Patients with Breast Cancer (BC) and/or Ovarian Cancer (OC) fulfilling established criteria were offered genetic counseling and BRCA1/2 testing; VUSs identified in index cases were checked in other relatives affected by BC/OC whenever possible. As an alternative, if BC/OC clustered only in one branch of the family, the parental origin of the VUS was investigated. Public prediction tools and databases were used to collect additional information on the variants analyzed.

Results: Out of 1045 patients undergoing BRCA1/2 testing in the period October 2011–April 2018, 66 (6.3%) carried class 3 VUSs. Cosegregation analysis was performed for 13 VUSs in 11 kindreds. Seven VUSs (53.8%) did not cosegregate with breast/ovarian cancer in the family, which provided evidence against their role in cancer clustering in those families. Among the 6 cosegregating VUSs, for two (BRCA1 c.5152+2T>G and BRCA2 c.7975A>G) additional evidence exists from databases and in silico tools supporting their pathogenicity, which reinforces the hypothesis they may have had a predisposing effect in respective families. For the remaining four VUSs (31%), cosegregation analysis failed to provide relevant information.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that cosegregation analysis in a clinical context may be helpful to improve test result interpretation in the specific family and, therefore, should be offered whenever possible. Besides, obtaining and sharing cosegregation data helps gathering evidence that may eventually contribute to VUS classification.

The challenges of the expanded availability of genomic information: an agenda-setting paper

Rapid advances in microarray and sequencing technologies are making genotyping and genome sequencing more affordable and readily available. There is an expectation that genomic sequencing technologies improve personalized diagnosis and personalized drug therapy. Concurrently, provision of direct-to-consumer genetic testing by commercial providers has enabled individuals' direct access to their genomic data. The expanded availability of genomic data is perceived as influencing the relationship between the various parties involved including healthcare professionals, researchers, patients, individuals, families, industry, and government. This results in a need to revisit their roles and responsibilities. In a 1-day agenda-setting meeting organized by the COST Action IS1303 "Citizen's Health through public-private Initiatives: Public health, Market and Ethical perspectives," participants discussed the main challenges associated with the expanded availability of genomic information, with a specific focus on public-private partnerships, and provided an outline from which to discuss in detail the identified challenges. This paper summarizes the points raised at this meeting in five main parts and highlights the key cross-cutting themes. In light of the increasing availability of genomic information, it is expected that this paper will provide timely direction for future research and policy making in this area.

Moving In and Out of the What-Ifs: The Experiences of Unaffected Women Living in Families Where a Breast Cancer 1 or 2 Genetic Mutation Was Not Found

BACKGROUND

In families where genetic testing for the breast cancer 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) has not identified a deleterious mutation, the risk for hereditary breast cancer (HBC) can still be high when there is a strong family history. Little is known about how an awareness of risk for HBC impacts the everyday lives of unaffected women (no personal history for breast and/or ovarian cancer) in these families.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore how unaffected women, living in BRCA1/2-negative families, experience living with risk for HBC.

METHODS

van Manen's hermeneutic phenomenological approach guided this study. Unaffected at-risk women were recruited from a hereditary breast and ovarian cancer clinic in Western Canada.

RESULTS

Nine women participated in 20 open-ended conversations. Phenomenological reflection on the 4 life existentials (lived space, body, time, and relations) revealed "Moving In and Out of the What-Ifs" as an overarching description that was communicated through the following themes: "Just Moving Along: Living a Normal Life," "Moving Into Those Dark Spaces," "Is there Something Wrong With Me"? "Markings in Time," "Living in the Moment," "Being Cared For," and "Keeping Me Grounded."

CONCLUSIONS

The findings reveal how knowledge from predictive medicine impacts the lives of women and the importance of supportive relations and provides a foundation for future research into how health is perceived.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The findings inform the practices of healthcare professionals as they engage in discussions with women living with risk for HBC and highlight the importance of a supportive relationship.

Opening Pandora's box?: ethical issues in prenatal whole genome and exome sequencing

OBJECTIVE

The development of genomic approaches to prenatal testing such as whole genome and exome sequencing offers the potential for a better understanding of prenatal structural anomalies in the fetus and ultimately for improved patient care and more informed reproductive decision making. In addition to the scientific and clinical challenges of achieving this, the introduction of new reproductive technologies also presents a number of ethical problems. The successful and appropriate development and introduction of prenatal genomics into clinical practice require these problems to be identified, understood and carefully analysed in the development of models of good ethical practice.

METHOD

We conducted a critical review of the existing literature on ethical issues in prenatal genomics.

RESULTS

We identified and discussed five areas of particular concern: valid consent, management and feed-back of information, responsibilities of health professionals, priority setting and resources and duties towards the future child.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for further discussion of the issues we have outlined here, and we hope that this brief summary of ethical arguments in the literature encourages researchers, clinicians, patients and scientists to engage in further discussion of these and other important issues raised by prenatal genomics. © 2017 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Lynch Syndrome Limbo: Patient Understanding of Variants of Uncertain Significance

Providers and patients encounter challenges related to the management of Variants of Unknown Significance (VUS). A VUS introduces new counseling dilemmas for the understanding and psychosocial impact of uncertain genetic test results. This descriptive study uses Mishel's theory of uncertainty in illness to explore the experience of individuals who have received a VUS as part of the genetic testing process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 adult individuals who received a VUS for Lynch syndrome mismatch repair genes between 2002 and 2013. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed. Most individuals recalled their result and perceived various types of uncertainty associated with their VUS. Half of the participants appraised their variant as a danger and implemented coping strategies to reduce the threat of developing cancer. Mobilizing strategies to reduce their risk included vigilant cancer surveillance, information seeking and notifying relatives. The majority of participants were unaware of the possibility of a VUS before receiving their result and expected reclassification over time. These results provide insight into the ways healthcare providers can support patients who receive VUS for Lynch syndrome. Findings also provide direction for future work that can further explicate the impact of receiving a VUS.

Breast Cancer Risk Perceptions among Relatives of Women with Uninformative Negative BRCA1/2 Test Results: The Moderating Effect of the Amount of Shared Information

The most common result of BRCA1/2 mutation testing when performed in a family without a previously identified mutation is an uninformative negative test result. Women in these families may have an increased risk for breast cancer because of mutations in non-BRCA breast cancer predisposition genes, including moderate- or low-risk genes, or shared environmental factors. Genetic counselors often encourage counselees to share information with family members, however it is unclear how much information counselees share and the impact that shared information may have on accuracy of risk perception in family members. We evaluated 85 sisters and daughters of women who received uninformative negative BRCA1/2 results. We measured accuracy of risk perception using a latent variable model where accuracy was represented as the correlation between perceived risk (indicators = verbal and quantitative measures) and calculated risk (indicators = Claus and BRCAPRO). Participants who reported more information was shared with them by their sister or mother about her genetic counseling session had greater accuracy of risk perception (0.707, p = 0.000) than those who reported little information was shared (0.326, p = 0.003). However, counselees shared very little information; nearly 20 % of family members reported their sister or mother shared nothing with them about her genetic counseling. Family members were generally not aware of the existence of a genetic counseling summary letter. Our findings underscore the need for effective strategies that facilitate counselees to share information about their genetic counseling sessions. Such communication may help their relatives better understand their cancer risks and enhance risk appropriate cancer prevention.

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.

Revealing the results of whole-genome sequencing and whole-exome sequencing in research and clinical investigations: some ethical issues

The introduction of new sequencing technologies whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-exome sequencing (WES) that are much less finely targeted than previous genetic tests has resulted in ethical debate about what should be done with clinically significant findings that may arise during the sequencing process. In this piece we argue that, in addition to whether the finding has been intentionally sought or arises incidentally, the ethical issues concerning what should be done with WES and WGS findings are also influenced by whether sequencing occurs in a clinical or research setting. We argue that decisions about the disclosure of WGS and WES findings generated in the clinical context are much less ethically contentious than decision making about the feedback of research results. We conclude by calling for greater transparency about the purpose of sample collection, more explicit protocols for transitioning between research and clinical contexts and patients and research participants to be warned of the potential for incidental findings to be generated, their potential significance and the actions that might be taken as a result.

Follow-up effects of a tailored pre-counseling website with question prompt in breast cancer genetic counseling

OBJECTIVE

Pre-counseling education helps counselees to prepare for breast cancer genetic counseling and might subsequently result in more positive experiences, improved cognitive outcomes and more experienced control. This study assessed the effects of a website with tailored information and a blank sheet to fill in questions (question prompt; QP), at 1 week and 1 year post-counseling.

METHODS

Consecutive counselees were randomized to the usual care group (UC) or the intervention group (UC+website+QP). Counselees completed questionnaires pre- and post-counseling and 1 year follow-up. We conducted multilevel regression analyses corrected for time.

RESULTS

Intervention group counselees (n = 103) were more satisfied about their final visit (β = .35; CI: .06-.65; P = .02; n = 156) than UC group counselees (n = 94). Intervention group counselees also reported more positive experiences with the counseling (β = .32; CI: .06-.59; P = .02; n = 188) and higher perceived personal control 1 year post-counseling (β = .51; CI: .18-.84; P = .002; n = 193). No significant effects were found on recall, knowledge, anxiety, cancer worry, risk perception alignment and adherence to breast surveillance advice.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that pre-counseling education providing tailored information and QP, might lead to improvements in experiences with the counseling and perceived personal control 1 year post-counseling.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Online pre-visit information is a feasible tool to enhance counselees' experiences.

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.

Accuracy of recall of information about a cancer-predisposing BRCA1/2 gene mutation among patients and relatives

This observational study aimed to (i) compare the accuracy of information recalled by patients and relatives following genetic counselling about a newly identified BRCA1/2 mutation, (ii) identify differences in accuracy of information about genetics and hereditary cancer and (iii) investigate whether accuracy among relatives improved when information was provided directly by genetics health professionals. Semistructured interviews following results from consultations with 10 breast/ovarian cancer patients and 22 relatives were audio-recorded and transcribed. Information provided by the genetics health professional was tracked through the families and coded for accuracy. Accuracy was analysed using the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test. Sources of information were tested using Spearman's rank-order correlation coefficient. Fifty-three percent of the information recalled by patients was accurate. Accuracy of recall among relatives was significantly lower than that among patients (P=0.017). Both groups recalled a lower proportion of information about hereditary cancer than about genetics (P=0.005). Relatives who learnt the information from the patient alone recalled significantly less accurate information than those informed directly by genetics health professionals (P=0.001). Following genetic counselling about a BRCA1/2 mutation, accuracy of recall was low among patients and relatives, particularly about hereditary cancer. Multiple sources of information, including direct contact with genetics health professionals, may improve the accuracy of information among relatives.

Genetic testing and familial implications in breast-ovarian cancer families

DNA-testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 has become incorporated in the diagnostic procedure of patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer. Since 1994 an immense amount of information has been gathered on mutation spectra, mutation risk assessment, cancer risks for mutation carriers, factors that modify these risks, unclassified DNA variants, surveillance strategies and preventive options. For the patient and family the main determinator still is whether a mutation is found or not. When a pathogenic mutation is detected in an index case, relatives can opt for pre-symptomatic DNA testing. However in the vast majority no mutation, or only unclear mutations are detectable yet. This means that a hereditary cause cannot be excluded, but pre-symptomatic DNA-testing is still unavailable for relatives. Surveillance for both index cases and relatives is based of the family history of cancer. Next generation genetic testing may help to elucidate genetic causes in these families.

Informing relatives about their hereditary or familial cancer risk: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Genetic counseling for hereditary breast or colon cancer has implications for both counselees and their relatives. Although counselees are encouraged by genetic counselors to disclose genetic cancer risk information, they do not always share this information with their at-risk relatives. Reasons for not informing relatives may be generally categorized as a lack of knowledge, motivation and/or self-efficacy. Presented here is the protocol of a randomized controlled trial that aims to establish the effectiveness of an intervention focused on supporting counselees in their disclosure of genetic cancer information to their relatives.

METHODS/DESIGN

A multicenter randomized controlled trial with parallel group design will be used to compare the effects of an additional telephone counseling session performed by psychosocial workers to enhance the disclosure of genetic cancer information to at-risk relatives (intervention group) with a control group of standard care. Consecutive index patients with relatives at risk for hereditary or familial breast and/or ovarian cancer or colon cancer, are randomly assigned (block size: 8; 1:1 allocation ratio) to the intervention (n = 132) or control group (n = 132, standard care). Primary outcomes are counselees' knowledge, motivation and self-efficacy regarding informing their relatives.

DISCUSSION

This intervention may prove important in supporting counselees to disclose hereditary and/or familial cancer risk information to at-risk relatives and may enable more at-risk relatives to make a well-informed decision regarding genetic services and/or screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered in the Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR) with trial ID number NTR3745.

Genetic risk assessments in individuals at high risk for inherited breast cancer in the breast oncology care setting

BACKGROUND

It has become increasingly common to consider BRCA mutation status when determining optimal cancer risk management and treatment options in order to improve patient outcomes. Knowledge about the risk for hereditary cancer at or as close as possible to the time of diagnosis allows patients access to the most risk reduction options available.

METHODS

This paper illustrates the role of genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast cancer, using hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome as a model due to germline mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2. Specifically, the value of genetic counseling and testing for HBOC across the cancer prevention and control continuum is outlined as it pertains to breast cancer.

RESULTS

In recognition of the importance of risk assessment for hereditary breast cancer, leading health professional organizations have developed specific guidelines and recommendations to providers for identification of women at increased risk for carrying a BRCA mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

Institutional efforts specific to genetic counseling and testing have resulted in the implementation of a model driven by physician recommendation as a referral system for high-risk breast cancer patients. Establishing an infrastructure to support research, education, and outreach initiatives focused on BRCA genetic counseling and testing will provide information that can improve the delivery of cancer genetics services.

Physicians' perspectives on the uncertainties and implications of chromosomal microarray testing of children and families

Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has improved the diagnostic rate of genomic disorders in pediatric populations, but can produce uncertain and unexpected findings. This article explores clinicians' perspectives and identifies challenges in effectively interpreting results and communicating with families about CMA. Responses to an online survey were obtained from 40 clinicians who had ordered CMA. Content included practice characteristics and perceptions, and queries about a hypothetical case involving uncertain and incidental findings. Data were analyzed using nonparametric statistical tests. Clinicians' comfort levels differed significantly for explaining uncertain, abnormal, and normal CMA results, with lowest levels for uncertain results. Despite clinical guidelines recommending informed consent, many clinicians did not consider it pertinent to discuss the potential for CMA to reveal information concerning biological parentage or predisposition to late-onset disease, in a hypothetical case. Many non-genetics professionals ordering CMA did not feel equipped to interpret the results for patients, and articulated needs for education and access to genetics professionals. This exploratory study highlights key challenges in the practice of genomic medicine, and identifies needs for education, disseminated practice guidelines, and access to genetics professionals, especially when dealing with uncertain or unexpected findings.

Do Breast Cancer Patients Tested in the Oncology Care Setting Share BRCA Mutation Results with Family Members and Health Care Providers?

BRCA genetic test results provide important information to manage cancer risk for patients and their families. Little is known on the communication of genetic test results by mutation status with family members and physicians in the oncology care setting. As part of a longitudinal study evaluating the impact of genetic counseling and testing among recently diagnosed breast cancer patients, we collected patients' self-reported patterns of disclosure. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample and determined the prevalence of disclosure of BRCA test results to family members and physicians. Of 100 patients who completed the baseline and the 6-month followup survey, 77 reported pursuing testing. The majority shared test results with female first-degree relatives; fewer did with males. Participants were more likely to share results with oncologists compared to surgeons, primary care physicians, or other specialty physicians. These findings suggest that while breast cancer patients may communicate results to at-risk female family members and their medical oncologist, they may need education and support to facilitate communication to other first-degree relatives and providers.

Genetic counseling does not fulfill the counselees' need for certainty in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer families: an explorative assessment

BACKGROUND

Many cancer-patients undergo DNA testing in the BRCA1/2 genes to receive information about the likelihood that cancer is heritable. Previous nonsystematic studies suggested that DNA testing often does not fulfill the counselees' needs for certainty. We explored the balance between the counselees' need for certainty and perceived certainty (NfC-PC, i.e., level of fulfillment of NfC) regarding the specific domains of DNA test result, heredity and cancer. We also examined relationships of NfC-PC with coping styles and distress.

METHOD

Before disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (T1), questionnaires were filled in by 467 cancer-patients. Another questionnaire (T2) was filled in after disclosure of pathogenic mutation results (n = 30), uninformative results (n = 202) or unclassified-variants (n = 16).

RESULTS

Before and after DNA test result disclosure, overall 58-94% of all counselees experienced unfulfilled NfC regarding the DNA test result, heredity and cancer. Compared with T1, the communication of pathogenic mutations (T2) caused more fulfillment of the NfC about the DNA test result, but less about cancer and heredity (p < .01). Compared with T1, unclassified variants (T2) did not significantly change the extent of fulfillment of all counselees' needs for certainty (NfC > PC). Compared with T1, uninformative results (T2) caused more fulfillments of all needs than before disclosure (p < 0.01). Counselees differentiated NfC and PC between the domains of DNA-test result, heredity and cancer (p < 0.01). The unfulfilled needs for certainty (NfC-PC) were uncorrelated with cognitive understanding of the DNA test result.

CONCLUSION

The counselees' NfC needs more attention in research and practice, for example, when the potential uncertainties of testing are discussed. The counselees' NfC may be assessed and used in tailored, mutual communication of DNA test results.

A counselee-oriented perspective on risk communication in genetic counseling: explaining the inaccuracy of the counselees' risk perception shortly after BRCA1/2 test result disclosure

PURPOSE

Genetic counseling may help counselees understand their genetic risk of developing breast/ovarian cancer. However, many studies have shown that their perception of their risks is inaccurate. Information-oriented variables often predicted the level of accuracy, focusing on specific processes of receiving and processing risks. We examined counselee-oriented predictors about how counselees embed cancer risks in their lives. These predictors reflect the personal meaning of genetic risks and are expected to explain/mediate the impact of genetic counseling on risk-perception-accuracy.

METHOD

We analyzed 248 questionnaires of a prospective study, filled in by probands with breast/ovarian cancer and pathogenic mutations, unclassified variants, or uninformative results (n = 30, 16, and 202, respectively). Mediation regression analyses were performed to examine whether counselee predictors mediated/explained the influence of information predictors on the accuracy. Information-oriented predictors regarded presentation format, communicated information, question format, education, pedigree information, cancer experience, and cognitive processes/heuristics. Counselee-oriented predictors regarded their self/personality, life/existence, and need for certainty about DNA test result, heredity, and cancer.

RESULTS

Both information-oriented and counselee-oriented variables significantly predicted the accuracy of the counselees' risk perception, with moderate to large effect sizes. Counselee-oriented variables completely mediated/explained the effects of information-oriented variables on the accuracy.

DISCUSSION

Counselees seemed to transform objective cancer risks into personally relevant information. Only through this personal meaning of genetic information, information-oriented processes seemed to cause inaccurate perceptions. Genetic counselors are suggested to focus communication on these personal processes.

A whisper-game perspective on the family communication of DNA-test results: a retrospective study on the communication process of BRCA1/2-test results between proband and relatives

Objective of this paper is to study how DNA-test result information was communicated and perceived within families. A retrospective descriptive study in 13 probands with a BRCA1/2 unclassified variant, 7 with a pathogenic mutation, 5 with an uninformative result, and in 44, 14, and 12 of their 1st and 2nd degree relatives respectively. We examined differences and correlations between: (a) information actually communicated (b) probands' perception, (c) relatives' perception. The perception consisted of recollections and interpretations of both their own and their relatives' cancer-risks, and heredity-likelihood (i.e. likelihood that cancer is heritable in the family). Differences and low correlations suggested few similarities between the actually communicated information, the probands' and the relatives' perception. More specifically, probands recalled the communicated information differently compared with the actually communicated information (R = .40), and reinterpreted this information differently (R = .30). The relatives' perception was best correlated with the proband's interpretation (R = .08), but this perception differed significantly from their proband's perception. Finally, relatives reinterpreted the information they received from their proband differently (R = .25), and this interpretation was only slightly related with the original message communicated by the genetic-counsellor (R = .15). Unclassified-variants were most frequently misinterpreted by probands and relatives, and had the largest differences between probands' and relatives' perceptions. Like in a children's whisper-game, many errors occur in the transmission of DNA-test result information in families. More attention is required for how probands disseminate information to relatives. Genetic-counsellors may help by supporting the probands in communicating to relatives, e.g. by providing clear summary letters for relatives.