Literature DB >> 22237432

Incidence and predictors of positive and negative effects of BRCA1/2 genetic testing on familial relationships: a 3-year follow-up study.

Julie Lapointe1, Karine Bouchard, Andrea Farkas Patenaude, Elizabeth Maunsell, Jacques Simard, Michel Dorval.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Little is known about the long-term impact of BRCA1/2 testing on the relationships between family members. We assessed the incidence of positive and negative family relationship effects of BRCA1/2 testing in the 3 years after result disclosure and identified predictors of these effects.
METHODS: A total of 485 women and 67 men who had undergone BRCA1/2 testing were asked 3 years later whether having been tested had improved and/or disrupted relationships with their relatives. The associations with sociodemographic, medical, and psychosocial characteristics were assessed.
RESULTS: Globally, 85.1% did not report any positive or negative effects of genetic testing on family relationships. Positive and negative effects were reported by 13.2% and 3.7% of participants, respectively. Reporting positive relationship effects was associated with older age, intolerance for uncertainty, cancer-specific distress, and more social support. Low education, positive attitude toward prophylactic mastectomy, and low social support increased the likelihood of negative effects.
CONCLUSION: Our findings do not support the belief that family relationships are frequently disrupted by BRCA1/2 testing. Understanding that most family relationships are unchanged long term by genetic testing may help genetic service providers encourage those considering testing to overcome hesitancy related to potential difficulties of communicating results to relatives.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22237432     DOI: 10.1038/gim.0b013e3182310a7f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  5 in total

1.  Genetic risk assessment for women with epithelial ovarian cancer: referral patterns and outcomes in a university gynecologic oncology clinic.

Authors:  Sue V Petzel; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Tracy Bensend; Anna Leininger; Peter A Argenta; Melissa A Geller
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Is the psychological impact of genetic testing moderated by support and sharing of test results to family and friends?

Authors:  Julie Lapointe; Michel Dorval; Catherine Noguès; Roxane Fabre; Claire Julian-Reynier
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Physicians' perspectives on the uncertainties and implications of chromosomal microarray testing of children and families.

Authors:  M Reiff; K Ross; S Mulchandani; K J Propert; R E Pyeritz; N B Spinner; B A Bernhardt
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 4.438

4.  Validation of a scale for assessing attitudes towards outcomes of genetic cancer testing among primary care providers and breast specialists.

Authors:  Anne-Deborah Bouhnik; Khadim N'Diaye; D Gareth Evans; Hilary Harris; Aad Tibben; Christi van Asperen; Joerg Schmidtke; Irmgard Nippert; Julien Mancini; Claire Julian-Reynier
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Self-guided management of exome and whole-genome sequencing results: changing the results return model.

Authors:  Joon-Ho Yu; Seema M Jamal; Holly K Tabor; Michael J Bamshad
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 8.822

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.