Literature DB >> 10450858

Psychological and social determinants of women's decisions to undergo genetic counseling and testing for breast cancer.

M Cappelli1, L Surh, L Humphreys, S Verma, D Logan, A Hunter, J Allanson.   

Abstract

This study examined the demand for breast cancer genetic testing and counseling among Canadian women diagnosed with breast cancer under the age of 50, together with some of the factors predicting both their intentions to be tested and the degree to which they act on their intentions. Participants were 110 women under the age of 50 and comprised of two groups: 1) women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC, n = 60): and 2) an index group of unaffected women from the general population (GP, n = 50). All participants completed a survey that addressed family history of breast and other cancers, demographic variables, knowledge and attitudes about breast cancer, and genetic testing. Members of the BC group were offered genetic counseling and testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 free of charge. Overall, 60% of participants indicated they would like the test, and 40% either did not want it or were uncertain. Seventy-two percent of women in the BC group wanted to be tested. Of these, only 49% had actually contacted the genetic counselor about testing at follow-up 3-15 months later. Intention to be tested was associated with presence of breast cancer, greater perceived benefits of testing, fewer perceived 'costs' of testing, and higher levels of concern about the risk of relatives developing breast cancer. Actual arranging to meet with the genetic counselor among women in the BC group was associated with fewer perceived costs of having the test. Results suggest a moderate level of interest in gene testing, though intention to be tested may not translate into actual uptake. Women who do choose to have the test may believe the potential 'costs' of using this new genetic technology to be relatively few. This has implications for genetic counselors in terms of providing balanced and complete information to women considering genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10450858     DOI: 10.1034/j.1399-0004.1999.550605.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  28 in total

1.  Prenatal genetic testing: an investigation of determining factors affecting the decision-making process.

Authors:  Monica Pivetti; Giannino Melotti
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine.

Authors:  Denise M Lautenbach; Kurt D Christensen; Jeffrey A Sparks; Robert C Green
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 8.929

3.  What patients and their relatives think about testing for BMPR2.

Authors:  Diana L Jones; Joanne C Sandberg; Mary J Rosenthal; Robert C Saunders; Vickie L Hannig; Ellen W Clayton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Correlates of depressive symptoms among women seeking cancer genetic counseling and risk assessment at a high-risk cancer clinic.

Authors:  Molly Middlecamp Kodl; Judith W Lee; Alicia K Matthews; Shelly A Cummings; Olufunmilayo I Olopade
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Measuring women's preferences for breast cancer treatments and BRCA1/BRCA2 testing.

Authors:  M Cappelli; L Surh; L Humphreys; S Verma; D Logan; A Hunter; J Allanson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.147

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

Review 7.  Predictors of genetic testing decisions: a systematic review and critique of the literature.

Authors:  Kate Sweeny; Arezou Ghane; Angela M Legg; Ho Phi Huynh; Sara E Andrews
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  The use of family history questionnaires: an examination of genetic risk estimates and genetic testing eligibility in the non-responder population.

Authors:  Susan Randall Armel; Kara Hitchman; Kathryn Millar; Laura Zahavich; Rochelle Demsky; Joan Murphy; Barry Rosen
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Health beliefs associated with readiness for genetic counseling among high risk breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Maija Reblin; Monica L Kasting; Kelli Nam; Courtney L Scherr; Jongphil Kim; Ram Thapa; Cathy D Meade; M Catherine Lee; Tuya Pal; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 2.431

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.