Literature DB >> 19775327

Controversies in communication of genetic risk for hereditary breast cancer.

Amy Mackenzie1, Linda Patrick-Miller, Angela R Bradbury.   

Abstract

Increased availability and heightened consumer awareness of "cancer genes" has increased consumer interest in, and demand for breast cancer risk assessment, and thus a pressing need for providers to identify effective, efficient methods of communicating complicated genetic information to consumers and their potentially at-risk relatives. With increasing direct-to-consumer and -physician marketing of predictive genetic tests, there has been considerable growth in web- and telephone-based genetic services. There is urgent need to further evaluate the psychosocial and behavioral outcomes (i.e., risks and benefits) of telephone and web-based methods of delivery before they become fully incorporated into clinical care models. Given the implications of genetic test results for family members, and the inherent conflicts in health care providers' dual responsibilities to protect patient privacy and to "warn" those at-risk, new models for communicating risk to at-risk relatives are emerging. Additional controversies arise when the at-risk relative is a minor. Research evaluating the impact of communicating genetic risk to offspring is necessary to inform optimal communication of genetic risk for breast cancer across the lifespan. Better understanding the risks and benefits associated with each of these controversial areas in cancer risk communication are crucial to optimizing adherence to recommended breast cancer risk management strategies and ensuring psycho-social well-being in the clinical delivery of genetic services for breast cancer susceptibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19775327     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00800.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast J        ISSN: 1075-122X            Impact factor:   2.431


  12 in total

1.  Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone Delivery of BRCA1/2 Genetic Counseling Compared With In-Person Counseling: 1-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Anita Y Kinney; Laurie E Steffen; Barbara H Brumbach; Wendy Kohlmann; Ruofei Du; Ji-Hyun Lee; Amanda Gammon; Karin Butler; Saundra S Buys; Antoinette M Stroup; Rebecca A Campo; Kristina G Flores; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Randomized noninferiority trial of telephone versus in-person genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Marc D Schwartz; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Beth N Peshkin; Jeanne Mandelblatt; Rachel Nusbaum; An-Tsun Huang; Yaojen Chang; Kristi Graves; Claudine Isaacs; Marie Wood; Wendy McKinnon; Judy Garber; Shelley McCormick; Anita Y Kinney; George Luta; Sarah Kelleher; Kara-Grace Leventhal; Patti Vegella; Angie Tong; Lesley King
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Parenting through genetic uncertainty: themes in the disclosure of breast cancer risk information to children.

Authors:  McKane E Sharff; Tiffani A DeMarco; Darren Mays; Beth N Peshkin; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Judy E Garber; Katherine A Schneider; Andrea F Patenaude; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2011-11-15

4.  Expanding access to BRCA1/2 genetic counseling with telephone delivery: a cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Anita Y Kinney; Karin M Butler; Marc D Schwartz; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kenneth M Boucher; Lisa M Pappas; Amanda Gammon; Wendy Kohlmann; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Saundra S Buys; Kristina G Flores; Rebecca A Campo
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  When parents disclose BRCA1/2 test results: their communication and perceptions of offspring response.

Authors:  Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Mary B Daly; Cynthia W Moore; Colleen B Sands; Helen Schmidheiser; Preethi K Kondamudi; Maia Feigon; Comfort N Ibe; Christopher K Daugherty
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Talking to children about maternal BRCA1/2 genetic test results: a qualitative study of parental perceptions and advice.

Authors:  Andrea Farkas Patenaude; Tiffani A DeMarco; Beth N Peshkin; Heiddis Valdimarsdottir; Judy E Garber; Katherine A Schneider; Larissa Hewitt; Jennifer Hamilton; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  The Influence of Adolescence on Parents' Perspectives of Testing and Discussing Inherited Cancer Predisposition.

Authors:  Corinna L Schultz; Melissa A Alderfer; Robert B Lindell; Zachary McClain; Kristin Zelley; Kim E Nichols; Carol A Ford
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-16       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Opportunities During Early Life for Cancer Prevention: Highlights From a Series of Virtual Meetings With Experts.

Authors:  Dawn M Holman; Natasha D Buchanan
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Intrafamilial disclosure of risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: points to consider.

Authors:  Lee Black; Kelly A McClellan; Denise Avard; Bartha Maria Knoppers
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-12-29

10.  Disparities in uptake of BRCA1/2 genetic testing in a randomized trial of telephone counseling.

Authors:  Morgan Butrick; Scott Kelly; Beth N Peshkin; George Luta; Rachel Nusbaum; Gillian W Hooker; Kristi Graves; Lisa Feeley; Claudine Isaacs; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Lina Jandorf; Tiffani DeMarco; Marie Wood; Wendy McKinnon; Judy Garber; Shelley R McCormick; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.