Literature DB >> 12490060

Motivations and concerns of women considering genetic testing for breast cancer: a comparison between affected and at-risk probands.

Rachael Brandt1, Ellen Hartmann, Zonera Ali, Rosemarie Tucci, Paul Gilman.   

Abstract

Since the discovery of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, there has been an increasing demand for breast cancer risk assessment programs. In an effort to understand and serve the population such programs target better, several studies have identified factors influencing high-risk women to pursue breast cancer risk assessment and genetic testing services; none, however, has focused on how the motivations and concerns of at-risk women may differ from their previously affected counterparts, who are typically the initial members of their families to undergo genetic testing. The majority of both previously affected and unaffected women felt that preventative surgery decisions, surveillance practices, the assessment of children's risks, and increased breast cancer anxiety were "more important" or "very important" issues regarding their thoughts about genetic testing. Significantly more affected women deemed family members' opinions "more" or "very important" (p < 0.01). Opinions concerning insurance and employment discrimination did not vary significantly between groups; however, a larger percentage of affected women felt this issue was of importance. Although all issues above should be addressed with women seeking cancer risk assessment and genetic testing, this research may help health care providers to gain a greater understanding of how the motivators and concerns of high-risk women can differ with personal cancer status so that referral, counseling, and education can be executed optimally.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12490060     DOI: 10.1089/109065702761403360

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Test        ISSN: 1090-6576


  9 in total

1.  Determinants of preferences for genetic counselling in Jewish women.

Authors:  Carmel Apicella; Stuart J Peacock; Lesley Andrews; Katherine Tucker; Agnes Bankier; Mary B Daly; John L Hopper
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 2.  Men's decision-making about predictive BRCA1/2 testing: the role of family.

Authors:  N Hallowell; A Ardern-Jones; R Eeles; C Foster; A Lucassen; C Moynihan; M Watson
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Predictors of participation in clinical and psychosocial follow-up of the kConFab breast cancer family cohort.

Authors:  Kelly-Anne Phillips; Phyllis N Butow; Ailsa E Stewart; Jiun-Horng Chang; Prue C Weideman; Melanie A Price; Sue Anne McLachlan; Geoffrey J Lindeman; Michael J McKay; Michael L Friedlander; John L Hopper
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  On using a cancer center cancer registry to identify newly affected women eligible for hereditary breast cancer syndrome testing: practical considerations.

Authors:  Tiffani A DeMarco; Christopher A Loffredo; Marilyn L Sampilo; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Awareness and preferences regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing among Latinas and non-Latina white women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Amanda Dawn Gammon; Erin Rothwell; Rebecca Simmons; Jan T Lowery; Lori Ballinger; Deirdre A Hill; Kenneth M Boucher; Anita Yeomans Kinney
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-06-21       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  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

7.  Withdrawal from genetic counselling for cancer.

Authors:  Eveline Bleiker; Gea Wigbout; Anja van Rens; Senno Verhoef; Laura Van't Veer; Neil Aaronson
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2005-02-15       Impact factor: 2.857

8.  Genetic test reporting of CDKN2A provides informational and motivational benefits for managing melanoma risk.

Authors:  Lisa G Aspinwall; Tammy K Stump; Jennifer M Taber; Danielle M Drummond; Wendy Kohlmann; Marjan Champine; Sancy A Leachman
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  Cancer-related worry and risk perception in Brazilian individuals seeking genetic counseling for hereditary breast cancer.

Authors:  Edenir Inêz Palmero; Natalia Campacci; Lavinia Schüler-Faccini; Roberto Giugliani; José Claudio Casali da Rocha; Fernando Regla Vargas; Patricia Ashton-Prolla
Journal:  Genet Mol Biol       Date:  2020-04-22       Impact factor: 1.771

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.