Literature DB >> 12496047

Psychosocial predictors of BRCA counseling and testing decisions among urban African-American women.

Hayley S Thompson1, Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir, Chantal Duteau-Buck, Josephine Guevarra, Dana H Bovbjerg, Cassandra Richmond-Avellaneda, David Amarel, Diana Godfrey, Karen Brown, Kenneth Offit.   

Abstract

Genetic counseling and testing for mutations in XXX (BRCA)1/2 genes that increase breast cancer susceptibility potentially offer a number of benefits (e.g., more informed decision making regarding breast cancer prevention options) but also raise potential problems (e.g., issues of discrimination). However, the literature suggests that African-American women underuse genetics-related services. Therefore, the primary aim of the current study was to investigate predictors of the use of genetic counseling and testing for breast cancer susceptibility in this population. Participants were 76 African-Americans at increased risk for breast cancer attributable to their family history of the disease. Participants were recruited from an urban cancer screening clinic and completed measures assessing sociodemographic information, breast cancer knowledge, breast cancer-specific emotional distress, and perceived benefits of and barriers to BRCA testing. Free BRCA counseling and testing were offered to all interested participants, and measures were completed before counseling sessions. On the basis of their subsequent acceptance or refusal of these services, participants were described as having either: (a) declined BRCA-related genetic counseling (GC-); (b) participated in genetic counseling but refused genetic testing (GC+GT-); or (c) participated in both genetic counseling and testing (GC+GT+). Results revealed that participants who declined counseling had significantly less knowledge of breast cancer genetics than those who accepted both counseling and testing. No differences emerged among the three groups in terms of perceived benefits of testing. However, participants declining counseling demonstrated significantly higher perceived barrier scores compared with those accepting counseling and testing. Specifically, those who did not participate in counseling reported greater anticipation of negative emotional responses to testing and more concern about stigmatization, whereas those who underwent both counseling and testing had significantly lower family-related guilt. Finally, cancer-specific distress was positively associated with participation in counseling, regardless of participation in testing. The current findings underscore the need for refinement of outreach and intervention efforts that both increase awareness of BRCA counseling and testing among African-American women and provide information to those considering these options.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12496047

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


  68 in total

1.  Development of a brochure for increasing awareness of inherited breast cancer in black women.

Authors:  Susan T Vadaparampil; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Anxhela Gjyshi; Tuya Pal
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2011 Jan-Feb

2.  The role of distress in uptake and response to predisposition genetic testing: the BMPR2 experience.

Authors:  Diana L Jones; Ellen W Clayton
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2011-11-15

3.  Cancer Survivorship Care: An Opportunity to Revisit Cancer Genetics.

Authors:  Kathryn J Ruddy; Betsy C Risendal; Judy E Garber; Ann H Partridge
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Increasing utilization of cancer genetic counseling services using a patient navigator model.

Authors:  Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Anna Sukhanova; Jennifer Ellis; Judy Mouchawar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Acceptance of genetic testing for hereditary breast ovarian cancer among study enrollees from an African American kindred.

Authors:  Anita Yeomans Kinney; Sara Ellis Simonsen; Bonnie Jeanne Baty; Diptasri Mandal; Susan L Neuhausen; Kate Seggar; Rich Holubkov; Ken Smith
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2006-04-15       Impact factor: 2.802

6.  Integrating genetic and genomic information into effective cancer care in diverse populations.

Authors:  L Fashoyin-Aje; K Sanghavi; K Bjornard; J Bodurtha
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 7.  Gynecologic cancer disparities: a report from the Health Disparities Taskforce of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

Authors:  Yvonne Collins; Kevin Holcomb; Eloise Chapman-Davis; Dineo Khabele; John H Farley
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Genetic Counseling Referral Rates in Long-Term Survivors of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Carlos H Barcenas; Maryam N Shafaee; Arup K Sinha; Akshara Raghavendra; Babita Saigal; Rashmi K Murthy; Ashley H Woodson; Banu Arun
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 11.908

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.  Cancer genetics service interest in women with a limited family history of breast cancer.

Authors:  Tamara J Somers; Julie C Michael; William M P Klein; Andrew Baum
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.