Support needs of couples with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer during reproductive decision making

OBJECTIVE

Reproductive decision making for couples with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is complex and can result in decisional conflict or regret. This study investigated couples' support needs and aimed to identify vulnerable couples. Ultimately, we should strive to develop a clear standard of care guideline regarding reproductive decision support.

METHODS

Mixed methods were used for data collection. A focus group study was conducted among 18 couples (N = 35) with HBOC who had made a reproductive decision after reproductive counselling. Subsequently, 129 similar couples (N = 258) were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey based on the focus group study.

RESULTS

Clinical and practical aspects of reproductive counselling were positively evaluated in the focus group study, although couples indicated a need for additional support with emotional and social concerns in which their relationship, social environment, and the way they picture their desired family were key elements. The survey was completed by 86 participants. Making a reproductive choice was experienced as (very) difficult by 43%, and 69% showed a need for additional support during decision making. Younger participants and those who opted for a natural pregnancy experienced more difficulty with reproductive decision making, and partners showed a higher need for psychological support than carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Couples with HBOC who need to make a reproductive decision have specific needs for guidance and support, of which the desired content and methods can vary. It is therefore important to identify vulnerable couples and to attune counselling to couples' needs.

Professionals' knowledge, attitude and referral behaviour of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer caused by a BRCA1/2 mutation is the most frequent indication for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in the Netherlands. The extent to which involved professionals are informed about this option, however, is unclear. The few available international studies mostly represent a limited range of professionals, and suggest that their knowledge about PGD for hereditary cancer syndromes is sparse and referral for PGD is based on limited understanding. A cross-sectional survey assessing awareness, knowledge, acceptability and PGD-referral for BRCA was completed by 188 professionals involved in the field of breast and ovarian cancer or reproduction. One-half of professionals were aware of PGD for BRCA, and most had a low to moderate level of knowledge. A total of 86% considered PGD for BRCA acceptable and 48% had referred patients with BRCA for PGD. Awareness and knowledge was higher among professionals who worked at a university hospital (compared with a general hospital). Knowledge of PGD was positively associated with discussing and referring for PGD, and PGD acceptability was associated with previous awareness. Although PGD counselling is the primary responsibility of the geneticist, other involved professionals may be gatekeepers as patients rely on them for raising awareness and referral.

Fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG): clinical trial design for rare ovarian tumours

This manuscript reports the consensus statements on designing clinical trials in rare ovarian tumours reached at the fifth Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference (OCCC) held in Tokyo, November 2015. Three important questions were identified concerning rare ovarian tumours (rare epithelial ovarian cancers (eOC), sex-cord stromal tumours (SCST) and germ cell tumours (GCT)): (i) What are the research and trial issues that are unique to rare ovarian tumours? There is a lack of randomised phase III data defining standards of care which makes it difficult to define control arms, but identifies unmet needs that merit investigation. Internationally agreed upon diagnostic criteria, expert pathological review and translational research are crucial. (ii) What should be investigated in rare eOC, GCT and SCST? Trials dedicated to each rare ovarian tumour should be encouraged. Nonetheless, where the question is relevant, rare eOC can be included in eOC trials but with rigorous stratification. Although there is emerging evidence suggesting that rare eOC have different molecular profiles, trials are needed to define new type-specific standards for each rare eOC (clear cell, low grade serous and mucinous). For GCTs, a priority is reducing toxicities from treatment while maintaining cure rates. Both a robust prognostic scoring system and more effective treatments for de novo poor prognosis and relapsed GCTs are needed. For SCSTs, validated prognostic markers as well as alternatives to the current standard of bleomycin/etoposide/cisplatin (BEP) should be identified. (iii) Are randomised trials feasible? Randomised controlled trials (RCT) should be feasible in any of the rare tumours through international collaboration. Ongoing trials have already demonstrated the feasibility of RCT in rare eOC and SCST. Mucinous OC may be considered for inclusion, stratified, into RCTs of non-gynaecological mucinous tumours, while RCTs in high risk or relapsed GCT may be carried out as a subset of male and/or paediatric germ cell studies.

Awareness and attitude regarding reproductive options of persons carrying a BRCA mutation and their partners

STUDY QUESTION

To what extent are BRCA mutation carriers and their partners in the Netherlands aware about preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) as reproductive options and what is their attitude towards these options?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Awareness of PGD (66%) and PND (61%) among BRCA mutation carriers and their partners is relatively high and 80% and 26%, respectively, of BRCA carriers and their partners find offering PGD and PND for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) acceptable.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Internationally, awareness of PGD among persons with a genetic cancer predisposition appears to be relatively low (35%) and although acceptability is generally high (71%), only a small proportion of mutation carriers would consider using PGD (36%). However, for HBOC, there are no studies available that investigated the perspective of individuals with a confirmed BRCA1/2 mutation and their partners about PGD and PND including demographic and medical correlates of awareness and acceptability.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional survey was completed by 191 participants between July 2012 and June 2013. Participants were recruited through patient organizations (88%) and the databases of two Clinical Genetics departments in the Netherlands (12%).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Male and female BRCA carriers and their partners completed an online survey, which assessed demographic and medical characteristics, and awareness, knowledge, acceptability and consideration of PGD and PND as main outcomes. Correlations between demographic and medical characteristics and the main outcomes were investigated.

MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE

The majority of respondents were female (87%), of reproductive age (86%) and about half reported a desire for a child in the future. About two-thirds (66%) were aware of PGD and 61% of PND for HBOC. PGD knowledge was moderate (5.5 on a 9-point scale) and acceptability of PGD and PND for HBOC was 80% and 26%, respectively. A minority would personally consider using PGD (39%) or PND (20%). Individuals with a higher educational level were more likely to be aware of PGD (P < 0.001) and PND (P < 0.001) and persons with a more immediate child wish were more often aware of PGD (P = 0.044) and had more knowledge about PGD (P = 0.001). PGD acceptability was positively associated with knowledge about PGD (P = 0.047), and PND acceptability was higher among partners in comparison to carriers (P = 0.001). Participants with a history of cancer and with a higher perceived seriousness of breast and ovarian cancer were more likely to consider using PGD (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001 respectively) or PND (P = 0.021 and P = 0.017 respectively).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The response rate (23%) of participants invited by the clinical genetics departments was low, probably related to a simultaneous study that used a similar recruitment strategy within the same target group, which may have resulted in selection bias. Moreover, PGD knowledge was measured with an instrument that is not yet validated since to date such an instrument is not available in the literature. Finally, the cross-sectional design of this study limits us from drawing any causal conclusions.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Improvement of information provision remains needed, in order to timely inform all couples with HBOC about the available reproductive options and enable them to make a balanced reproductive decision. This may limit the risk of negative psychological impact due to decisional conflict and possible regret.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon (grant number 2010.PS11.C74). None of the authors have competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

A family history questionnaire improves detection of women at risk for hereditary gynecologic cancer: a pilot study

Pilot study to evaluate whether the use of a standardized questionnaire to document family history of cancer improves identification of women who warrant referral to cancer genetic services (CGS) for increased risk of hereditary cancer, compared to their identification in usual care. Prospective intervention study with historic control group. Gynecology outpatient clinic, Maastricht University Medical Centre, the Netherlands. The prospective intervention group consisted of new outpatients between June 1 and August 1, 2011. The historic control group consisted of new outpatients between May 1, 2009 and April 30, 2010. A standardized questionnaire based on established referral criteria for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome was completed for the intervention group. The referral rate in routine consultation, based on non-standardized family history recording, was determined retrospectively for the control group. The difference in referral rate between intervention and control group, tested by Chi square test. In the control group, 8 of 3,036 women (0.26 %) were referred to CGS. In the intervention group, 209 (42 %) of 500 screening questionnaires were completed. Nineteen women (9, 1 %) met the referral guidelines, of which 5 were newly referred to CGS (2, 4 %). Referral rates differed significantly (p < 0.001) between the two groups. This pilot study shows that the routine use of a screening questionnaire may improve detection and referral rate to CGS of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer. Improving genetic literacy of physicians and use of web-site questionnaires deserve attention in future studies.

Evaluation of RAD51C as cancer susceptibility gene in a large breast-ovarian cancer patient population referred for genetic testing

Despite extensive analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, germline mutations are detected in <20% of families with a presumed genetic predisposition for breast and ovarian cancer. Recent literature reported RAD51C as a new breast cancer susceptibility gene. In this study, we report the analysis of 410 patients from 351 unrelated pedigrees. All were referred for genetic testing and we selected families with at least one reported case of ovarian cancer in which BRCA1&2 mutations were previously ruled out. We analyzed the coding exons, intron-exons boundaries, and UTRs of RAD51C. Our mutation analysis did not reveal any unequivocal deleterious mutation. In total 12 unique sequence variations were identified of which two were novel. Our study and others suggest a low prevalence of RAD51C mutations with an exception for some founder populations. This observation is in favor of the rare allele hypothesis in the debate over the nature of the genetic contribution to individual susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer and further genome-wide studies in high risk families are warranted.

Exploring the short-term impact of DNA-testing in breast cancer patients: the counselees' perception matters, but the actual BRCA1/2 result does not

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies suggest that learning a DNA-test-result has no direct impact on the medical-decisions and psychological well-being of counselees. Their perception, especially their recollections and interpretations of their cancer-risks and heredity, predict and/or mediate this impact. These studies were criticized for their small range of predictors, mediators, outcomes and contextual factors. We studied the short-term impact of DNA-testing with an extended model.

METHODS

Three months after disclosure of BRCA1/2-test-results, we sent counselees a questionnaire about their perception, medical and psychological outcomes, and medical, familial and psychological contexts. 248 affected women participated; 30 had received pathogenic-mutations, 16 unclassified-variants and 202 uninformative-results.

RESULTS

The actually communicated genetic-information and the contextual variables predicted the counselees' perception, but did not directly predict any outcomes. The counselees' perception predicted and/or completely mediated the counselees' medical intentions and behavior, physical and psychological life-changes, stigma, mastery, negativity and cancer-worries. Short-term distress was related to the perception not only of their own risks, but also of their relatives' risks and heredity-likelihood. Effect sizes were medium to large.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The outcomes of DNA-testing were better predicted by the counselees' perception than by the actually given genetic-information. We recommend genetic-counselors to have tailored, interactive dialogues about the counselees' perception.

Solitary oral neurofibroma

Neurofibroma is a benign tumor of the peripheral nerve sheath characterized by proliferation of Schwann's cells, perineural cells and endoneurial fibroblasts. The tumor occurs most often in the head and neck regions. We describe the occurrence of an isolated neurofibroma in the upper lip of a 14-year-old girl.