PURPOSE: This study evaluates the Alzheimer disease risk perceptions of individuals who accurately recall their genetics-based Alzheimer disease risk assessment. METHODS: Two hundred forty-six unaffected first-degree relatives of patients with Alzheimer disease were enrolled in a multisite randomized controlled trial examining the effects of communicating APOE genotype and lifetime Alzheimer disease risk information. RESULTS: Among the 158 participants who accurately recalled their Alzheimer disease risk assessment 6 weeks after risk disclosure, 75 (47.5%) believed their Alzheimer disease risk was more than 5% points different from the Alzheimer disease risk estimate they were given. Within this subgroup, 69.3% believed that their Alzheimer disease risk was higher than what they were told (discordant high), whereas 30.7% believed that their Alzheimer disease risk was lower (discordant low). Participants with a higher baseline risk perception were more likely to have a discordant-high risk perception (P < 0.05). Participants in the discordant-low group were more likely to be APOE epsilon4 positive (P < 0.05) and to score higher on an Alzheimer disease controllability scale (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that even among individuals who accurately recall their Alzheimer disease risk assessment, many people do not take communicated risk estimates at face value. Further exploration of this clinically relevant response to risk information is warranted.
PURPOSE: This study evaluates the Alzheimer disease risk perceptions of individuals who accurately recall their genetics-based Alzheimer disease risk assessment. METHODS: Two hundred forty-six unaffected first-degree relatives of patients with Alzheimer disease were enrolled in a multisite randomized controlled trial examining the effects of communicating APOE genotype and lifetime Alzheimer disease risk information. RESULTS: Among the 158 participants who accurately recalled their Alzheimer disease risk assessment 6 weeks after risk disclosure, 75 (47.5%) believed their Alzheimer disease risk was more than 5% points different from the Alzheimer disease risk estimate they were given. Within this subgroup, 69.3% believed that their Alzheimer disease risk was higher than what they were told (discordant high), whereas 30.7% believed that their Alzheimer disease risk was lower (discordant low). Participants with a higher baseline risk perception were more likely to have a discordant-high risk perception (P < 0.05). Participants in the discordant-low group were more likely to be APOE epsilon4 positive (P < 0.05) and to score higher on an Alzheimer disease controllability scale (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that even among individuals who accurately recall their Alzheimer disease risk assessment, many people do not take communicated risk estimates at face value. Further exploration of this clinically relevant response to risk information is warranted.
Authors: Susan LaRusse; J Scott Roberts; Theresa M Marteau; Heather Katzen; Erin L Linnenbringer; Melissa Barber; Peter Whitehouse; Kimberly Quaid; Tamsen Brown; Robert C Green; Norman R Relkin Journal: Genet Med Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Lisa Madlensky; Shirley W Flatt; Wayne A Bardwell; Cheryl L Rock; John P Pierce Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Colleen M McBride; Sharon Hensley Alford; Robert J Reid; Eric B Larson; Andreas D Baxevanis; Lawrence C Brody Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Annika Lidén; Gunilla Berglund; Mats G Hansson; Richard Rosenquist; P O Sjödén; Karin Nordin Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2003 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: Chris M R Smerecnik; Ilse Mesters; Eline Verweij; Nanne K de Vries; Hein de Vries Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2009-03-17 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Denise M Lautenbach; Kurt D Christensen; Jeffrey A Sparks; Robert C Green Journal: Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet Date: 2013 Impact factor: 8.929
Authors: Aaron J Carman; Rennie Ferguson; Robert Cantu; R Dawn Comstock; Penny A Dacks; Steven T DeKosky; Sam Gandy; James Gilbert; Chad Gilliland; Gerard Gioia; Christopher Giza; Michael Greicius; Brian Hainline; Ronald L Hayes; James Hendrix; Barry Jordan; James Kovach; Rachel F Lane; Rebekah Mannix; Thomas Murray; Tad Seifert; Diana W Shineman; Eric Warren; Elisabeth Wilde; Huntington Willard; Howard M Fillit Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: S B Haga; W T Barry; R Mills; L Svetkey; S Suchindran; H F Willard; G S Ginsburg Journal: Public Health Genomics Date: 2014-02-27 Impact factor: 2.000