Literature DB >> 21204803

Colonoscopy use following mutation detection in Lynch syndrome: exploring a role for cancer screening in adaptation.

D W Hadley1, S Ashida, J F Jenkins, K A Calzone, I R Kirsch, L M Koehly.   

Abstract

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited form of colorectal cancer. Mutation carriers can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with colorectal cancer through colonoscopy. Theoretical models suggest that such health-related behaviors might also bring psychological benefits. This study assessed whether colonoscopy following mutation detection was associated with the levels of depressive symptoms. Data were obtained from a prospective family cohort study offering genetic services for LS. Participants completed questionnaires prior to the provision of services and 6 months post-receipt of mutation results. One hundred thirty-four (134) persons were identified to carry a mutation and completed both the questionnaires. Main outcome measures were depressive symptoms 6 months post-receipt of test results. Mutation carriers who did not complete a colonoscopy within the 6 months following receipt of results were six times (p < 0.01; odds ratio = 6.06) more likely to report depressive symptoms at a level of clinical importance post-receipt of test results compared to those who did undergo colonoscopy. Facilitating the expeditious use of colonoscopy following mutation detection may benefit newly identified mutation carriers by addressing the objective risks for cancer and moderating underlying emotional distress responses to genetic risk information. Furthermore, depressive symptoms may interfere with behavioral compliance in some patients, suggesting referral to mental health specialists. Published 2011. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21204803      PMCID: PMC3407565          DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2010.01622.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  30 in total

1.  Colorectal Cancer Screening Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Bernard Levin; James S Barthel; Randall W Burt; Donald S David; James M Ford; Francis M Giardiello; Stephen B Gruber; Amy L Halverson; Stanley Hamilton; Wendy Kohlmann; Kirk A Ludwig; Patrick M Lynch; Christopher Marino; Edward W Martin; Robert J Mayer; Boris Pasche; Samuel J Pirruccello; Ashwani Rajput; M Sambasiva Rao; Moshe Shike; Gideon Steinbach; Jonathan P Terdiman; David Weinberg; Sidney J Winawer
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 11.908

Review 2.  Illness representations, self-regulation, and genetic counseling: a theoretical review.

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Comparison of individuals opting for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC genetic susceptibility testing with regard to coping, illness perceptions, illness experiences, family system characteristics and hereditary cancer distress.

Authors:  Iris van Oostrom; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Hugo J Duivenvoorden; Annette H J T Bröcker-Vriends; Christi J van Asperen; Rolf H Sijmons; Caroline Seynaeve; Arthur R Van Gool; Jan G M Klijn; Aad Tibben
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2006-07-26

4.  Cancer risk in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome: later age of onset.

Authors:  Heather Hampel; Julie A Stephens; Eero Pukkala; Risto Sankila; Lauri A Aaltonen; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Albert de la Chapelle
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Ellen R Gritz; Susan K Peterson; Sally W Vernon; Salma K Marani; Walter F Baile; Beatty G Watts; Christopher I Amos; Marsha L Frazier; Patrick M Lynch
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-03-20       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Applying a cognitive behavioral model of health anxiety in a cancer genetics service.

Authors:  Katharine A Rimes; Paul M Salkovskis; Linda Jones; Anneke M Lucassen
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.267

7.  Predictive testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: subjective perception regarding colorectal and endometrial cancer, distress, and health-related behavior at one year post-test.

Authors:  Erna Claes; Lieve Denayer; Gerry Evers-Kiebooms; Andrea Boogaerts; Kristien Philippe; Sabine Tejpar; Koen Devriendt; Eric Legius
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2005

Review 8.  Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review.

Authors:  Noralane M Lindor; Gloria M Petersen; Donald W Hadley; Anita Y Kinney; Susan Miesfeldt; Karen H Lu; Patrick Lynch; Wylie Burke; Nancy Press
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Cancer risks for mismatch repair gene mutation carriers: a population-based early onset case-family study.

Authors:  Mark A Jenkins; Laura Baglietto; James G Dowty; Christine M Van Vliet; Letitia Smith; Leeanne J Mead; Finlay A Macrae; D James B St John; Jeremy R Jass; Graham G Giles; John L Hopper; Melissa C Southey
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 11.382

10.  Decrease in mortality in Lynch syndrome families because of surveillance.

Authors:  Andrea E de Jong; Yvonne M C Hendriks; Jan H Kleibeuker; Sybrand Y de Boer; Annemieke Cats; Gerrit Griffioen; Fokko M Nagengast; Frits G Nelis; Matti A Rookus; Hans F A Vasen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  6 in total

1.  Teaching genomic counseling: preparing the genetic counseling workforce for the genomic era.

Authors:  Gillian W Hooker; Kelly E Ormond; Kevin Sweet; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-02-08       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Influence of patient preferences on the cost-effectiveness of screening for lynch syndrome.

Authors:  Grace Wang; Miriam Kuppermann; Benjamin Kim; Kathryn A Phillips; Uri Ladabaum
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  Psychosocial consequences of predictive genetic testing for Lynch syndrome and associations to surveillance behaviour in a 7-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Katja Aktan-Collan; Helena Kääriäinen; Heikki Järvinen; Päivi Peltomäki; Kirsi Pylvänäinen; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Ari Haukkala
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  How does genetic risk information for Lynch syndrome translate to risk management behaviours?

Authors:  Emma Steel; Andrew Robbins; Mark Jenkins; Louisa Flander; Clara Gaff; Louise Keogh
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 2.857

Review 5.  The utility of Leventhal's model in the analysis of the psycho-behavioral implications of familial cancer - a literature review.

Authors:  Roxana Postolica; Magdalena Iorga; Mihaela Savin; Doina Azoicai; Violeta Enea
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 3.318

6.  Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review.

Authors:  Andrada Ciucă; Ramona Moldovan; Adriana Băban
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 4.430

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.