Literature DB >> 12833555

Attitudes, knowledge, risk perceptions and decision-making among women with breast and/or ovarian cancer considering testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 and their spouses.

Leslie G Bluman1, Barbara K Rimer, Katherine Regan Sterba, Julia Lancaster, Shelly Clark, Nancy Borstelmann, J Dirk Iglehart, Eric P Winer.   

Abstract

A limited number of studies have examined the involvement of spouses in the decision-making process for genetic testing as well as impact of the actual testing. This report presents data from 40 women with a personal history of breast and/or ovarian cancer who were considering genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 and their spouses. We examined knowledge and attitudes regarding genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility, perceptions of the likelihood that their wives (the women) had a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, pros and cons of genetic testing, spouses' satisfaction with their involvement in the decision-making process and additional resources they would find helpful. Knowledge about cancer genetics and genetic testing for BRCA1 and BCA2 was limited among both women and their spouses. Up to one-third of spouses indicated that they would like to avail themselves of additional sources of information about BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. Most spouses indicated that they thought their wives had a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and that their wives' breast cancers would recur. Pros of genetic testing were emphasized more than cons among both parties. Overall, spouses were satisfied with their role in the decision-making process. Future interventions to improve the decision-making process regarding genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility should be undertaken. Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12833555     DOI: 10.1002/pon.653

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychooncology        ISSN: 1057-9249            Impact factor:   3.894


  6 in total

Review 1.  Cancers related to genetic mutations: important psychosocial issues for Canadian family physicians.

Authors:  Tara E Power; John Robinson
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Knowledge of and interest in genetic results among Parkinson disease patients and caregivers.

Authors:  Karina Sakanaka; Cheryl H Waters; Oren A Levy; Elan D Louis; Wendy K Chung; Karen S Marder; Roy N Alcalay
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-06-09       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  How important is the opinion of significant others to cancer patients' adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making?

Authors:  A M Stiggelbout; S J T Jansen; W Otten; M C M Baas-Thijssen; H van Slooten; C J H van de Velde
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-11-21       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Testicular cancer and genetics knowledge among familial testicular cancer family members.

Authors:  June A Peters; Ellen B Beckjord; Deliya R Banda Ryan; Ann G Carr; Susan T Vadaparampil; Jennifer T Loud; Larissa Korde; Mark H Greene
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Changes to perceptions of the pros and cons of genetic susceptibility testing after APOE genotyping for Alzheimer disease risk.

Authors:  Kurt D Christensen; J Scott Roberts; Wendy R Uhlmann; Robert C Green
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 8.822

6.  Design of the BRISC study: a multicentre controlled clinical trial to optimize the communication of breast cancer risks in genetic counselling.

Authors:  Caroline F Ockhuysen-Vermey; Lidewij Henneman; Christi J van Asperen; Jan C Oosterwijk; Fred H Menko; Daniëlle R M Timmermans
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2008-10-03       Impact factor: 4.430

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.