1
|
Makhnoon S, Arun B, Bedrosian I. Helping Patients Understand and Cope with BRCA Mutations. Curr Oncol Rep 2022; 24:733-740. [PMID: 35303253 PMCID: PMC8930486 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-022-01254-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Purpose of Review Individuals carrying germline mutations in BRCA1/2 have unique psychosocial and educational needs that must be met to ensure informed clinical decision-making. In this review, we highlight the strategies used in clinical practice to support patients’ needs as well as currently available pre- and post-disclosure support interventions. Recent Findings Clinical risk communication is complicated by the uncertainty associated with gene penetrance, inconclusive results, variable effectiveness of surgical and screening interventions, and inadequate awareness of clinical genetics. Interventions to support patients’ psychosocial needs, and strategies for effective and scalable clinical risk communication are in routine use and largely effective at meeting patients’ needs. Research is underway to develop newer supportive resources; however, the inadequate representation of all mutation carriers persists. Summary Effective clinical risk communication strategies, decision support aids, written educational materials, and supportive psychosocial tools can together have a large impact on meeting BRCA carriers’ supportive needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sukh Makhnoon
- Department of Behavioral Science, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Dan L. Duncan Building, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Unit 1330, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
| | - Banu Arun
- Department of Breast Medical Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| | - Isabelle Bedrosian
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brédart A, Kop JL, Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, De Pauw A, Tischkowitz M, Ehrencrona H, Schmidt MK, Dolbeault S, Rhiem K, Easton DF, Devilee P, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Schmutlzer R. Clinicians' use of breast cancer risk assessment tools according to their perceived importance of breast cancer risk factors: an international survey. J Community Genet 2019; 10:61-71. [PMID: 29508368 PMCID: PMC6325038 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-018-0362-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2017] [Accepted: 02/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
The BOADICEA breast cancer (BC) risk assessment model and its associated Web Application v3 (BWA) tool are being extended to incorporate additional genetic and non-genetic BC risk factors. From an online survey through the BOADICEA website and UK, Dutch, French and Swedish national genetic societies, we explored the relationships between the usage frequencies of the BWA and six other common BC risk assessment tools and respondents' perceived importance of BC risk factors. Respondents (N = 443) varied in age, country and clinical seniority but comprised mainly genetics health professionals (82%) and BWA users (93%). Oncology professionals perceived reproductive, hormonal (exogenous) and lifestyle BC risk factors as more important in BC risk assessment compared to genetics professionals (p values < 0.05 to 0.0001). BWA was used more frequently by respondents who gave high weight to breast tumour pathology and low weight to personal BC history as BC risk factors. BWA use was positively related to the weight given to hormonal BC risk factors. The importance attributed to lifestyle and BMI BC risk factors was not associated with the use of BWA or any of the other tools. Next version of the BWA encompassing additional BC risk factors will facilitate more comprehensive BC risk assessment in genetics and oncology practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Brédart
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-Oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Cedex 05, Paris, France.
- University Paris Descartes, 71 avenue Edouard Vaillant, 92774, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
| | - Jean-Luc Kop
- Université de Lorraine, 2LPN-CEMA, 23 boulevard Albert 1er-BP, 60446-54001 Cedex, Nancy, France
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alex P Cunningham
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Antoine De Pauw
- Institut Curie, Cancer genetic clinic, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of Cambridge, Box 238, Level 6 Addenbrooke's Treatment Centre Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Hans Ehrencrona
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Laboratory Medicine, Office for Medical Services and Department of Clinical Genetics, Lund University, 221 85, Lund, Sweden
| | - Marjanka K Schmidt
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Division of Molecular Pathology, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sylvie Dolbeault
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-Oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 Cedex 05, Paris, France
- CESP, University Paris-Sud, UVSQ, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier, 94807, Villejuif, France
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34, I 50931, Cologne, Germany
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Worts Causeway, CB1 8RN, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Human Genetics, Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Centre, S4-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Rita Schmutlzer
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34, I 50931, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Keogh LA, Steel E, Weideman P, Butow P, Collins IM, Emery JD, Mann GB, Bickerstaffe A, Trainer AH, Hopper LJ, Phillips KA. Consumer and clinician perspectives on personalising breast cancer prevention information. Breast 2018; 43:39-47. [PMID: 30445378 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2018] [Revised: 10/23/2018] [Accepted: 11/03/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Personalised prevention of breast cancer has focused on women at very high risk, yet most breast cancers occur in women at average, or moderately increased risk (≤moderate risk). OBJECTIVES To determine; 1) interest of women at ≤ moderate risk (consumers) in personalised information about breast cancer risk; 2) familial cancer clinicians' (FCCs) perspective on managing women at ≤ moderate risk, and; 3) both consumers' and FCCs reactions to iPrevent, a personalised breast cancer risk assessment and risk management decision support tool. METHODS Seven focus groups on breast cancer risk were conducted with 49 participants; 27 consumers and 22 FCCs. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS Consumers reported some misconceptions, low trust in primary care practitioners for breast cancer prevention advice and frustration that they often lacked tailored advice about breast cancer risk. They expressed interest in receiving personalised risk information using iPrevent. FCCs reported an inadequate workforce to advise women at ≤ moderate risk and reacted positively to the potential of iPrevent to assist. CONCLUSIONS While highlighting a potential role for iPrevent, several outstanding issues remain. For personalised prevention of breast cancer to extend beyond women at high risk, we must harness women's interest in receiving tailored information about breast cancer prevention and identify a workforce willing to advise women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L A Keogh
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia.
| | - E Steel
- Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - P Weideman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - P Butow
- Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-Making (CeMPED) and the Psycho-Oncology Cooperative Research Group (PoCoG), The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - I M Collins
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; The Greater Green Triangle Clinical School, Deakin University School of Medicine, Warrnambool, Australia
| | - J D Emery
- Department of General Practice, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - G B Mann
- The Breast Service, Royal Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - A Bickerstaffe
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - A H Trainer
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Medicine, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - L J Hopper
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - K A Phillips
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia; Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Patient-Centered Care in Breast Cancer Genetic Clinics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2018; 15:ijerph15020319. [PMID: 29439543 PMCID: PMC5858388 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15020319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2017] [Revised: 02/01/2018] [Accepted: 02/07/2018] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
With advances in breast cancer (BC) gene panel testing, risk counseling has become increasingly complex, potentially leading to unmet psychosocial needs. We assessed psychosocial needs and correlates in women initiating testing for high genetic BC risk in clinics in France and Germany, and compared these results with data from a literature review. Among the 442 counselees consecutively approached, 212 (83%) in France and 180 (97%) in Germany, mostly BC patients (81% and 92%, respectively), returned the ‘Psychosocial Assessment in Hereditary Cancer’ questionnaire. Based on the Breast and Ovarian Analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm (BOADICEA) BC risk estimation model, the mean BC lifetime risk estimates were 19% and 18% in France and Germany, respectively. In both countries, the most prevalent needs clustered around the “living with cancer” and “children-related issues” domains. In multivariate analyses, a higher number of psychosocial needs were significantly associated with younger age (b = −0.05), higher anxiety (b = 0.78), and having children (b = 1.51), but not with country, educational level, marital status, depression, or loss of a family member due to hereditary cancer. These results are in line with the literature review data. However, this review identified only seven studies that quantitatively addressed psychosocial needs in the BC genetic counseling setting. Current data lack understandings of how cancer risk counseling affects psychosocial needs, and improves patient-centered care in that setting.
Collapse
|
5
|
Brédart A, Kop JL, Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, De Pauw A, Tischkowitz M, Ehrencrona H, Dolbeault S, Robieux L, Rhiem K, Easton DF, Devilee P, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Schmutlzer R. Use of the BOADICEA Web Application in clinical practice: appraisals by clinicians from various countries. Fam Cancer 2018; 17:31-41. [PMID: 28623477 PMCID: PMC5770489 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-017-0014-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
The 'BOADICEA' Web Application (BWA) used to assess breast cancer risk, is currently being further developed, to integrate additional genetic and non-genetic factors. We surveyed clinicians' perceived acceptability of the existing BWA v3. An online survey was conducted through the BOADICEA website, and the British, Dutch, French and Swedish genetics societies. Cross-sectional data from 443 participants who provided at least 50% responses were analysed. Respondents varied in age and, clinical seniority, but mainly comprised women (77%) and genetics professionals (82%). Some expressed negative opinions about the scientific validity of BOADICEA (9%) and BWA v3 risk presentations (7-9%). Data entry time (62%), clinical utility (22%) and ease of communicating BWA v3 risks (13-17%) received additional negative appraisals. In multivariate analyses, controlling for gender and country, data entry time was perceived as longer by genetic counsellors than clinical geneticists (p < 0.05). Respondents who (1) considered hormonal BC risk factors as more important (p < 0.01), and (2) communicated numerical risk estimates more frequently (p < 0.001), judged BWA v3 of lower clinical utility. Respondents who carried out less frequent clinical activity (p < 0.01) and respondents with '11 to 15 years' seniority (p < 0.01) had less favourable opinions of BWA v3 risk presentations. Seniority of '6 to 10 years' (p < 0.05) and more frequent numerical risk communication (p < 0.05) were associated with higher fear of communicating the BWA v3 risks to patients. The level of genetics training did not affect opinions. Further development of BWA should consider technological, genetics service delivery and training initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Brédart
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France.
- University Paris Descartes, 71 avenue Edouard Vaillant, 92774, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
| | - Jean-Luc Kop
- Université de Lorraine, Inter-Psy, 3 Place Godefroy de Bouillon, 54015, Nancy Cedex, France
| | - Antonis C Antoniou
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Worts Causeway, Cambridge, CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Alex P Cunningham
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Worts Causeway, Cambridge, CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Antoine De Pauw
- Institut Curie, Cancer Genetic Clinic, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France
| | - Marc Tischkowitz
- Department of Medical Genetics, University of Cambridge, Level 6 Addenbrooke's Treatment Centre Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 238, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Hans Ehrencrona
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Laboratory Medicine, Office for Medical Services and Department of Clinical Genetics, Lund University, Universitetssjukhuset, 221 85, Lund, Sweden
| | - Sylvie Dolbeault
- Institut Curie, Supportive Care Department, Psycho-oncology Unit, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris Cedex 05, France
- CESP, University Paris-Sud, UVSQ, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, 16 Avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier, 94807, Villejuif Cedex, France
| | - Léonore Robieux
- University Paris Descartes, 71 avenue Edouard Vaillant, 92774, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34 I, 50931, Cologne, Germany
| | - Douglas F Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Worts Causeway, Cambridge, CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Peter Devilee
- Department of Human Genetics, Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Centre, S4-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Rita Schmutlzer
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, Cologne University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Kerpener Str. 34 I, 50931, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Anderson AS, Caswell S, Macleod M, Steele RJ, Berg J, Dunlop J, Stead M, Eadie D, O'Carroll RE. Health Behaviors and their Relationship with Disease Control in People Attending Genetic Clinics with a Family History of Breast or Colorectal Cancer. J Genet Couns 2017; 26:40-51. [PMID: 27312973 PMCID: PMC5258810 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-9977-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2016] [Accepted: 05/23/2016] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
The current work aimed to assess health behaviors, perceived risk and control over breast/colorectal cancer risk and views on lifestyle advice amongst attendees at cancer family history clinics. Participants attending the East of Scotland Genetics Service were invited to complete a questionnaire (demographic data, weight and height, health behaviors and psycho-social measures of risk and perceived control) and to participate in an in-depth interview. The questionnaire was completed by 237 (49 %) of attendees, ranging from 18 to 77 years (mean age 46 (±10) years). Reported smoking rates (11 %) were modest, most (54 %) had a BMI > 25 kg/m2, 55 % had low levels of physical activity, 58 % reported inappropriate alcohol intakes and 90 % had fiber intakes indicative of a low plant diet. Regression analysis indicated that belief in health professional control was associated with higher, and belief in fatalism with poorer health behavior. Qualitative findings highlighted doubts about the link between lifestyle and cancer, and few were familiar with the current evidence. Whilst lifestyle advice was considered interesting in general there was little appetite for non-tailored guidance. In conclusion, current health behaviors are incongruent with cancer risk reduction guidance amongst patients who have actively sought advice on disease risk. There are some indications that lifestyle advice would be welcomed but endorsement requires a sensitive and flexible approach, and the acceptability of lifestyle interventions remains to be explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annie S Anderson
- Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Mailbox 7, Level 7, Ninewells Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK.
| | - Stephen Caswell
- Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Mailbox 7, Level 7, Ninewells Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK
| | - Maureen Macleod
- Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Mailbox 7, Level 7, Ninewells Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK
| | - Robert Jc Steele
- Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Mailbox 7, Level 7, Ninewells Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK
| | - Jonathan Berg
- East of Scotland Genetics Service, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK
| | - Jacqueline Dunlop
- East of Scotland Genetics Service, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK
| | - Martine Stead
- Institute for Social Marketing, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
| | - Douglas Eadie
- Institute for Social Marketing, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
| | - Ronan E O'Carroll
- Division of Psychology, School of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK
| |
Collapse
|