Literature DB >> 10207643

Participation in breast cancer susceptibility testing protocols: influence of recruitment source, altruism, and family involvement on women's decisions.

G Geller1, T Doksum, B A Bernhardt, S A Metz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We offered education, counseling, and family-based BRCA1/2 testing to women at increased risk of breast cancer and assessed (a) their reasons for participating and (b) whether source of recruitment, desire to help research (altruism), and the need to communicate with their affected relative about testing distinguish those who did and those who did not complete each phase of our protocol.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We sent invitations to 403 women who had completed a questionnaire on BRCA1/2 testing, 178 of whom were considered high risk because they had more than one relative on the same side of the family with early-onset breast cancer.
RESULTS: Among the 132 high-risk respondents from the mid-Atlantic states (where testing was offered), 36% (n = 47) were interested in counseling. Those who actually attended counseling were more likely to have some college education, a higher perceived risk of breast cancer, and a greater fear of stigma and were less likely to have a daughter than those who did not attend. The reasons for attending that were rated "very important" were to learn about the test (80%), to have the test (43%), and to help research (38%). High-risk women were eligible for testing only if their affected relative was willing to be tested and tested positive. After the session, 83% intended to ask their affected relative to be tested, but only half of the affected relatives actually came for pretest counseling. The proportion of participants who ultimately involved an affected relative was 2.5 times higher among women from a clinical population (25%) than among those from a registry population (10%); in this latter population, an altruistic desire to help research was a greater motivator for participation than interest in being tested.
CONCLUSIONS: Source of recruitment influences both motivations to attend education and counseling and actual testing behavior. These results have implications for interpretation of findings from studies in research settings as well as for informed consent and decision-making in the context of family-based testing.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10207643

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  21 in total

1.  Family environments of women seeking BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic mutation testing: an exploratory analysis.

Authors:  Lisa A Keenan; Karen T Lesniak; Charles A Guarnaccia; Becky Althaus; Gaby Ethington; Joanne L Blum
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Value of recruitment strategies used in a primary care practice-based trial.

Authors:  Shellie D Ellis; Alain G Bertoni; Denise E Bonds; C Randall Clinch; Aarthi Balasubramanyam; Caroline Blackwell; Haiying Chen; Michael Lischke; David C Goff
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 2.226

3.  Sources of uncertainty about daughters' breast cancer risk that emerge during genetic counseling consultations.

Authors:  Carma L Bylund; Carla L Fisher; Dale Brashers; Shawna Edgerson; Emily A Glogowski; Sherry R Boyar; Yelena Kemel; Sara Spencer; David Kissane
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  What's at stake? Genetic information from the perspective of people with epilepsy and their family members.

Authors:  Sara Shostak; Dana Zarhin; Ruth Ottman
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  The Colored, Eco-Genetic Relationship Map (CEGRM): A Conceptual Approach and Tool for Genetic Counseling Research.

Authors:  R Kenen; J Peters
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Use of a patient-entered family health history tool with decision support in primary care: impact of identification of increased risk patients on genetic counseling attendance.

Authors:  Adam H Buchanan; Carol A Christianson; Tiffany Himmel; Karen P Powell; Astrid Agbaje; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Vincent C Henrich; Lori A Orlando
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  An analysis of the Research Team-Service User relationship from the Service User perspective: a consideration of 'The Three Rs' (Roles, Relations, and Responsibilities) for healthcare research organisations.

Authors:  Melanie Jordan; Emma Rowley; Richard Morriss; Nick Manning
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Women's perceptions of the personal and family impact of genetic cancer risk assessment: focus group findings.

Authors:  Deborah J MacDonald; Linda Sarna; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Betty Ferrell
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Impact of Genetic Counseling and Testing on Altruistic Motivations to Test for BRCA1/2: a Longitudinal Study.

Authors:  Rahul Garg; Joseph Vogelgesang; Kimberly Kelly
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Experiences and decisions that motivate women at increased risk of breast cancer to participate in an experimental screening program.

Authors:  Michelle Proulx; Marie-Dominique Beaulieu; Christine Loignon; Marie-Hélène Mayrand; Christine Maugard; Nathalie Bellavance; Diane Provencher
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-02-14       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.