Psychosocial and Ethical Issues Relating to Genetic Testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes

BRCA1/2 testing for genetic susceptibility to cancer after 25 years: A scoping review and a primer on ethical implications

BACKGROUND

Mutations in the genes called BRCA1 and BRCA2 are associated with significantly elevated lifetime risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. This year marks 25 years since genetic tests for BRCA1/2 mutations became available to the public. Currently, comprehensive guidelines exist regarding BRCA1/2 testing and preventive measures in mutation carriers. As such, BRCA1/2 testing represents a precedent not only in genetic testing and management of genetic cancer risk, but also in bioethics. The goal of the current research was to offer a review and an ethical primer of the main ethical challenges related to BRCA testing.

METHOD

A systematic scoping review was undertaken following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Four databases were searched and 18 articles that met the inclusion criteria were synthetized narratively into a conceptual map.

RESULTS

Ethical discussions revolved around the BRCA1/2 gene discovery, how tests are distributed for clinical use, the choice to undergo testing, unresolved issues in receiving and disclosing test results, reproductive decision-making, and culture-specific ethics. Several unique properties of the latest developments in testing circumstances (e.g., incorporation of BRCA1/2 testing in multi-gene or whole genome sequence panels and tests sold directly to consumers) significantly raised the complexity of ethical debates.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary ethical discussion is necessary to guide not only individual decision making but also societal practices and medical guidelines in light of the new technologies available and the latest results regarding psychological, social, and health outcomes in cancer previvors and survivors affected by BRCA mutations.

Examining information-seeking behavior in genetic testing for cancer predisposition: A qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess information needs and information sources and seeks to illustrate what at-risk individuals consider motivators of and barriers to information-seeking before and after genetic testing for cancer predisposition.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with people seeking genetic counseling in Switzerland were analyzed qualitatively using thematic analysis. Wilson's model of information behavior was the theoretical framework.

RESULTS

We identified four themes that illustrate motivators of and barriers to information-seeking: attitudes and emotions; knowledge; social environment; and demographic factors. We also elucidated information needs and collected participants' information sources.

CONCLUSION

This study£s empirical approach helps healthcare professionals to understand their patients' behaviors and wishes concerning information-seeking more concretely than theoretical models alone. The study also identifies information gaps, especially outside the genetic counseling setting.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Genetic counselors and other healthcare professionals need to purposefully assist patients in finding trustworthy and accessible information. Healthcare professionals in all disciplines need to be educated about predictive genetic testing.

Web-based return of BRCA2 research results: one-year genetic counselling experience in Iceland

There is an increased pressure to return results from research studies. In Iceland, deCODE Genetics has emphasised the importance of returning results to research participants, particularly the founder pathogenic BRCA2 variant; NM_000059.3:c.771_775del. To do so, they opened the website www.arfgerd.is . Individuals who received positive results via the website were offered genetic counselling (GC) at Landspitali in Reykjavik. At the end of May 2019, over 46.000 (19% of adults of Icelandic origin) had registered at the website and 352 (0.77%) received text message informing them about their positive results. Of those, 195 (55%) contacted the GC unit. Additionally, 129 relatives asked for GC and confirmatory testing, a total of 324 individuals. Various information such as gender and age, prior knowledge of the variant and perceived emotional impact, was collected. Of the BRCA2 positive individuals from the website, 74 (38%) had prior knowledge of the pathogenic variant (PV) in the family. The majority initially stated worries, anxiety or other negative emotion but later in the process many communicated gratitude for the knowledge gained. Males represented 41% of counsellees as opposed to less than 30% in the regular hereditary breast and ovarian (HBOC) clinic. It appears that counselling in clinical settings was more reassuring for worried counsellees. In this article, we describe one-year experience of the GC service to those who received positive results via the website. This experience offers a unique opportunity to study the public response of a successful method of the return of genetic results from research.