PURPOSE: To assess the impact of direct-to-consumer marketing for genetic testing among women of varying genetic risk for breast and ovarian cancer. METHODS: Telephone surveys were conducted with 315 women in Denver, Colorado, one target audience for the Myriad BRACAnalysis ad campaign. Genetic risk was determined from personal and family history and grouped by probability of having a BRCA1/2 mutation (low <5%, moderate 5-<10%, high > or =10%). RESULTS: High-risk women were more knowledgeable about BRACAnalysis and more likely to recall the media ads than were low-risk women (60 vs. 39%, P < 0.01). After seeing the ads, about 40% of women were more interested in testing and about 10% expressed increased worry about developing breast or ovarian cancer. Women across all risk groups overstated the benefits and appropriateness of testing. An equal percentage of high- and low-risk women (51 and 60%) felt that they would benefit from genetic testing. CONCLUSION: The campaign effectively reached a large audience. Concern about breast cancer was not appreciably increased. A large percentage of low-risk women (not candidates for testing) expressed interest in testing, suggesting the campaign was too broad. A campaign targeted at high-risk women, who may benefit from testing might be preferred.
PURPOSE: To assess the impact of direct-to-consumer marketing for genetic testing among women of varying genetic risk for breast and ovarian cancer. METHODS: Telephone surveys were conducted with 315 women in Denver, Colorado, one target audience for the Myriad BRACAnalysis ad campaign. Genetic risk was determined from personal and family history and grouped by probability of having a BRCA1/2 mutation (low <5%, moderate 5-<10%, high > or =10%). RESULTS: High-risk women were more knowledgeable about BRACAnalysis and more likely to recall the media ads than were low-risk women (60 vs. 39%, P < 0.01). After seeing the ads, about 40% of women were more interested in testing and about 10% expressed increased worry about developing breast or ovarian cancer. Women across all risk groups overstated the benefits and appropriateness of testing. An equal percentage of high- and low-risk women (51 and 60%) felt that they would benefit from genetic testing. CONCLUSION: The campaign effectively reached a large audience. Concern about breast cancer was not appreciably increased. A large percentage of low-risk women (not candidates for testing) expressed interest in testing, suggesting the campaign was too broad. A campaign targeted at high-risk women, who may benefit from testing might be preferred.