PURPOSE: Although not currently recommended, genetic testing of minors for adult hereditary cancer syndromes, along with risks and benefits, is still being debated. Thus, we evaluated parent opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing of minors, in general, and hypothetically, for parents' own minor child. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted to assess parent opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing in minors, along with parent rationale for and factors associated with these opinions. RESULTS: In total, 246 parents at two academic cancer risk assessment programs who underwent BRCA1/2 testing completed the interview (60% response rate). In response to a dichotomous question, 37% of parents supported testing minors. Responses to an open-ended query suggest that 47% support testing minors in some or all circumstances. Parent negative BRCA1/2 test result (P = .02), parent male sex (P = .03), and minority race (P = .01) were independently associated with support of testing minors. In response to a dichotomous question, 44% of parents reported hypothetical interest in testing their own minor offspring. Responses to an open-ended query suggest that 55% would consider, hypothetically, testing their child in some or all circumstances. Parent negative test result (P = .01), less than a college education (P < .01), and older mean offspring age (P = .05) were associated with interest in testing one's own child. CONCLUSION: Parents' opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing of minors are divided. Given the lack of evidence supporting either the permission or restriction of BRCA1/2 testing in minors, further evaluation of the risks and benefits of providing genetic risk information and genetic testing to minors for adult-onset disease is needed to inform clinical practice and guidelines.
PURPOSE: Although not currently recommended, genetic testing of minors for adult hereditary cancer syndromes, along with risks and benefits, is still being debated. Thus, we evaluated parent opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing of minors, in general, and hypothetically, for parents' own minor child. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted to assess parent opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing in minors, along with parent rationale for and factors associated with these opinions. RESULTS: In total, 246 parents at two academic cancer risk assessment programs who underwent BRCA1/2 testing completed the interview (60% response rate). In response to a dichotomous question, 37% of parents supported testing minors. Responses to an open-ended query suggest that 47% support testing minors in some or all circumstances. Parent negative BRCA1/2 test result (P = .02), parent male sex (P = .03), and minority race (P = .01) were independently associated with support of testing minors. In response to a dichotomous question, 44% of parents reported hypothetical interest in testing their own minor offspring. Responses to an open-ended query suggest that 55% would consider, hypothetically, testing their child in some or all circumstances. Parent negative test result (P = .01), less than a college education (P < .01), and older mean offspring age (P = .05) were associated with interest in testing one's own child. CONCLUSION: Parents' opinions regarding BRCA1/2 testing of minors are divided. Given the lack of evidence supporting either the permission or restriction of BRCA1/2 testing in minors, further evaluation of the risks and benefits of providing genetic risk information and genetic testing to minors for adult-onset disease is needed to inform clinical practice and guidelines.
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
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
Authors: Brooke L Levenseller; Danielle J Soucier; Victoria A Miller; Diana Harris; Laura Conway; Barbara A Bernhardt Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 2.537