Abstract P6-08-01: Perceptions of breast cancer risk, psychological adjustment and behaviors in adolescent girls at high-risk and population-risk for breast cancer

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that many girls from breast cancer (BC) families are aware of their increased risk for BC. How this awareness impacts their psychosocial adjustment and health behaviors remains unknown.

METHODS: 11–19 YO girls at high-risk (HR) or population-risk (PR) for BC completed self-administered quantitative surveys informed by the Self-Regulation Theory of Health Behavior. Girls with a first or second-degree relative with BC were classified as HR. For hypothesis testing, we used simple linear and logistic regressions. To account for correlation of responses within families, we used robust (cluster-corrected) standard errors or Generalized Estimating Equations.

RESULTS: 47 PR and 89 HR girls have completed surveys. Age did not differ between groups (Mage = 15.6; SD=2.4). 30% of HR girls have a mother with BC. 67% of HR girls vs. 30% of PR girls reported self-perceived risk for adult BC to be “higher than other girls my age,” (p = <0.01, Table 1).

Should Minors Be Offered BRCA1/2 Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer? Opinions of Parents Who Have Undergone BRCA1/2 Testing

Background: Professional societies recommend against the genetic testing of minors for hereditary cancer syndromes that present in adulthood. Yet, many adolescent specialists indicate that they would consider BRCA1/2 testing of minor children. We conducted interviews with parents who have had BRCA1/2 testing, to evaluate their opinions regarding the genetic testing of minors for BRCA1/2. Methods: 244 parents, including 67 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (MCs), 140 parents with uninformative negative results (UN), 14 with true negative results (TN) & 23 with a variant of uncertain significance (VUS), from two cancer risk assessment programs completed semi-structured interviews. We used multiple logistic regressions to evaluate the associations among biomedical factors, demographic factors and support of testing minors. Wald tests and likelihood ratio tests were used to assess statistical significance for binary covariates and nominal covariates. Results: 38% of parents supported testing minors for BRCA1/2 in response to a dichotomous (Y/N) question. Support was greatest among parents with TN (64%) and UN (40%) results and lower among MCs (31%) and parents with a VUS (26%). In a multivariable analysis, support was greatest among parents who tested negative (p=0.02), were of minority race (p=0.06) and among fathers (<0.01). Responses to open-ended questions suggest that 27% of parents unconditionally support testing of minors, and 25% support testing only in certain situations. Psychological risks, a lack of medical necessity and the insufficient maturity of minors, were frequent concerns of those opposed. The potential to positively impact minors' health behaviors was the most reported reason for supporting testing. Conclusions: Up to 52% of parents who have undergone BRCA1/2 testing support pediatric testing for BRCA1/2. Given willingness among general and pediatric practitioners and interest among parents, further research is necessary to formally evaluate the risks and benefits of providing genetic testing to minors for adult-onset hereditary cancer syndromes in order to inform clinical practice and public policy that will ensure optimal psychosocial and medical outcomes for all members of families at risk for hereditary cancer.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 4071.

Telephone disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results? Experience and opinions of genetic counselors and consumers

1510

Background: BRCA1/2 test results have historically been disclosed in person (IPD) by a certified genetic counselor (GC). Greater consumer demand and access to BRCA1/2 testing, and greater prevalence and acceptance of telemedicine, have interested providers in conducting BRCA1/2 testing and disclosing results by telephone (TD) and internet. GC and consumer experiences and opinions about TD have not been well described. Methods: To determine experience, opinions and interest in TD of BRCA1/2 test results we conducted semi-structured interviews with 194 GC recruited via NSGC Cancer Special Interest Group and with 30 consumers (to date) less than 9 months post IPD of BRCA1/2 test results at two cancer centers. Descriptive statistics characterize GC and consumer experiences and opinions. Results: 98% GC had provided TD; 46% rarely. Most frequent reasons for TD: perceived consumer hardship of IPD (n = 190); consumer preference (n = 49) and medical benefit (n = 30). GC comfort with TD varied by test result (true negative [TN] 77%, indeterminate [IND] 49%; mutation carriers [MC] 37%; variant of unknown significance [VUS] 33%). GC cited consumer convenience (n = 132), medical (n = 71) and psychological benefit (n = 42), and greater GC counseling capacity (n = 33) as TD advantages. No nonverbal communication (n = 161), poorer communication/understanding (n = 67), and difficulty explaining complex results (n = 41) were disadvantages GC most frequently reported. 46% post-IPD consumers reported interest in TD; interest varied by test result (VUS 67%; IND, 63%; TN 57%; MC 25%). Consumers’ perceived advantages: convenience (n = 22) and medical benefit (n = 9); and disadvantage to TD; lack of visual and personal connection with GC (n = 18). Conclusions: Results of the ongoing study suggest many consumers of BRCA1/2 testing are interested in, and nearly all GC have conducted, TD. GC and consumers share perceptions of TD convenience, and of challenges of lack of visual cues, however, GC comfort with, and consumer preference for, TD vary differently by test result. Given consumer and provider interest, longitudinal study of TD impact on knowledge, risk perception, communication, and health behaviors, and their mediators will be critical to develop policy and procedures optimizing adaptive responses to TD.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.