Literature DB >> 22328347

Long-term psychosocial outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing: differences across affected status and risk-reducing surgery choice.

Kristi D Graves1, Patti Vegella, Elizabeth A Poggi, Beth N Peshkin, Angie Tong, Claudine Isaacs, Clinton Finch, Scott Kelly, Kathryn L Taylor, George Luta, Marc D Schwartz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have documented the short-term impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) testing; however, little research has examined the long-term impact of testing. We conducted the first long-term prospective study of psychosocial outcomes in a U.S. sample of women who had BRCA1/2 testing.
METHODS: Participants were 464 women who underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Prior to testing, we measured sociodemographics, clinical variables, and cancer specific and general distress. At long-term follow-up (Median = 5.0 years; Range = 3.4-9.1 years), we assessed cancer-specific and genetic testing distress, perceived stress, and perceived cancer risk. We evaluated the impact of BRCA1/2 test result and risk-reducing surgery on long-term psychosocial outcomes.
RESULTS: Among participants who had been affected with breast or ovarian cancer, BRCA1/2 carriers reported higher genetic testing distress (β = 0.41, P < 0.0001), uncertainty (β = 0.18, P < 0.0001), and perceived stress (β = 0.17, P = 0.005) compared with women who received negative (i.e., uninformative) results. Among women unaffected with breast/ovarian cancer, BRCA1/2 carriers reported higher genetic testing distress (β = 0.39, P < 0.0001) and lower positive testing experiences (β = 0.25, P = 0.008) than women with negative results. Receipt of risk-reducing surgery was associated with lower perceived cancer risk (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In this first prospective long-term study in a U.S. sample, we found modestly increased distress in BRCA1/2 carriers compared with women who received uninformative or negative test results. Despite this modest increase in distress, we found no evidence of clinically significant dysfunction. IMPACT: Although a positive BRCA1/2 result remains salient among carriers years after testing, testing does not seem to impact long-term psychologic dysfunction. ©2012 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22328347      PMCID: PMC3297701          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0991

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  41 in total

1.  Psychological impact of genetic counselling and testing in women previously diagnosed with breast cancer.

Authors:  J Randall; P Butow; J Kirk; K Tucker
Journal:  Intern Med J       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.048

2.  The Brief Symptom Inventory: an introductory report.

Authors:  L R Derogatis; N Melisaratos
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 7.723

3.  The impact of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy on quality of life and psychological distress in women with a BRCA mutation.

Authors:  Amy Finch; Kelly A Metcalfe; Jaclyn Chiang; Lorraine Elit; John McLaughlin; Caitlin Springate; Mary Jane Esplen; Rochelle Demsky; Joan Murphy; Barry Rosen; Steven A Narod
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 3.894

4.  A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire.

Authors:  David Cella; Chanita Hughes; Amy Peterman; Chih-Hung Chang; Beth N Peshkin; Marc D Schwartz; Lari Wenzel; Amy Lemke; Alfred C Marcus; Caryn Lerman
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.267

5.  Psychological impact of genetic testing in women from high-risk breast cancer families.

Authors:  B Meiser; P Butow; M Friedlander; A Barratt; V Schnieden; M Watson; J Brown; K Tucker
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Iris van Oostrom; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Litanja N Lodder; Hugo J Duivenvoorden; Arthur R van Gool; Caroline Seynaeve; Conny A van der Meer; Jan G M Klijn; Bert N van Geel; Curt W Burger; Juriy W Wladimiroff; Aad Tibben
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Evaluation of psychosocial effects of pre-symptomatic testing for breast/ovarian and colon cancer pre-disposing genes: a 12-month follow-up.

Authors:  Brita Arver; Aina Haegermark; Ulla Platten; Annika Lindblom; Yvonne Brandberg
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress.

Authors:  M Horowitz; N Wilner; W Alvarez
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  1979-05       Impact factor: 4.312

9.  What do ratings of cancer-specific distress mean among women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer?

Authors:  James C Coyne; Linda Kruus; Melissa Racioppo; Kathleen A Calzone; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2003-01-30       Impact factor: 2.802

10.  Impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 counseling and testing on newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Marc D Schwartz; Caryn Lerman; Barbara Brogan; Beth N Peshkin; Chanita Hughes Halbert; Tiffani DeMarco; William Lawrence; David Main; Clinton Finch; Colette Magnant; Marie Pennanen; Theodore Tsangaris; Shawna Willey; Claudine Isaacs
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-04-05       Impact factor: 50.717

View more
  35 in total

Review 1.  Striking a balance in communicating pharmacogenetic test results: promoting comprehension and minimizing adverse psychological and behavioral response.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga; Rachel Mills; Hayden Bosworth
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2014-06-21

2.  Self-Regulation Principles Underlying Risk Perception and Decision Making within the Context of Genomic Testing.

Authors:  Linda D Cameron; Barbara Bowles Biesecker; Ellen Peters; Jennifer M Taber; William M P Klein
Journal:  Soc Personal Psychol Compass       Date:  2017-05-05

3.  Predictors of genetic testing uptake in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Mary K Ladd; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Gillian Hooker; Shawna Willey; Heiddis Valdimarsdottir; Tiffani DeMarco; Suzanne O'Neill; Savannah Binion; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  Beliefs about Genetically Targeted Care in African Americans.

Authors:  Chanita Hughes Halbert; Jasmine A McDonald; Gayenell Magwood; Melanie Jefferson
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  Distress and the parenting dynamic among BRCA1/2 tested mothers and their partners.

Authors:  Darren Mays; Tiffani A DeMarco; George Luta; Beth N Peshkin; Andrea F Patenaude; Katherine A Schneider; Judy E Garber; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 4.267

6.  Distress, uncertainty, and positive experiences associated with receiving information on personal genomic risk of melanoma.

Authors:  Amelia K Smit; Ainsley J Newson; Megan Best; Caro-Anne Badcock; Phyllis N Butow; Judy Kirk; Kate Dunlop; Georgina Fenton; Anne E Cust
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-04-30       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Behavioral and psychosocial responses to genomic testing for colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Kristi D Graves; Kara-Grace Leventhal; Rachel Nusbaum; Yasmin Salehizadeh; Gillian W Hooker; Beth N Peshkin; Morgan Butrick; William Tuong; Jeena Mathew; David Goerlitz; Mary B Fishman; Peter G Shields; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 5.736

8.  Living With Genetic Vulnerability: a Life Course Perspective.

Authors:  Rebekah J Hamilton; Nancy A Innella; Dawn T Bounds
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Intentions for bilateral mastectomy among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Lesley King; Suzanne C O'Neill; Elizabeth Spellman; Beth N Peshkin; Heiddis Valdimarsdottir; Shawna Willey; Kara Grace Leventhal; Tiffani DeMarco; Rachel Nusbaum; Elizabeth Feldman; Lina Jandorf; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 3.454

10.  "Is it really worth it to get tested?": primary care patients' impressions of predictive SNP testing for colon cancer.

Authors:  Kara-Grace Leventhal; William Tuong; Beth N Peshkin; Yasmin Salehizadeh; Mary B Fishman; Susan Eggly; Kevin FitzGerald; Marc D Schwartz; Kristi D Graves
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.