PURPOSE: To examine changes in cancer-related knowledge, distress, and decisional conflict from pre- to post-genetic counseling (GC) in before (BDS) and after (ADS) definitive surgery breast cancer (BC) patients. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline; primary outcome data were collected before (T1) and after (T2) pretest GC. Within group changes for cancer-related knowledge, distress, and decisional conflict over genetic testing were compared by Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Of 103 BC patients, 87 were ADS and 16 were BDS. Analyses revealed that both groups reported significant increases in knowledge between T1 and T2 (median change 4.2, p = 0.004, and 2.7, p < 0.001, for BDS and ADS patients, respectively). Overall cancer-related distress showed a downward trend between T1 and T2 for both groups and was significant for BDS patients (p = 0.041). Reports of BDS patients trended toward overall and subscale-specific increases in decisional conflict, with the exception of the uncertainty which trended downward, but did not reach significance. Overall decisional conflict decreased in ADS patients, approaching marginal significance (p = 0.056), with significant improvements in informed decision making (median change -12.6, p < 0.001; i.e., pretest GC yielded improved knowledge of benefits, risks, and side effects of available options). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that pretest GC increases cancer-related knowledge for both BDS and ADS patients, decreases distress in BDS patients, and improves informed decision making in ADS patients. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to replicate these results.
PURPOSE: To examine changes in cancer-related knowledge, distress, and decisional conflict from pre- to post-genetic counseling (GC) in before (BDS) and after (ADS) definitive surgery breast cancer (BC) patients. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline; primary outcome data were collected before (T1) and after (T2) pretest GC. Within group changes for cancer-related knowledge, distress, and decisional conflict over genetic testing were compared by Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Of 103 BC patients, 87 were ADS and 16 were BDS. Analyses revealed that both groups reported significant increases in knowledge between T1 and T2 (median change 4.2, p = 0.004, and 2.7, p < 0.001, for BDS and ADS patients, respectively). Overall cancer-related distress showed a downward trend between T1 and T2 for both groups and was significant for BDS patients (p = 0.041). Reports of BDS patients trended toward overall and subscale-specific increases in decisional conflict, with the exception of the uncertainty which trended downward, but did not reach significance. Overall decisional conflict decreased in ADS patients, approaching marginal significance (p = 0.056), with significant improvements in informed decision making (median change -12.6, p < 0.001; i.e., pretest GC yielded improved knowledge of benefits, risks, and side effects of available options). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that pretest GC increases cancer-related knowledge for both BDS and ADS patients, decreases distress in BDS patients, and improves informed decision making in ADS patients. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to replicate these results.
Authors: Susan M Domchek; Tara M Friebel; Christian F Singer; D Gareth Evans; Henry T Lynch; Claudine Isaacs; Judy E Garber; Susan L Neuhausen; Ellen Matloff; Rosalind Eeles; Gabriella Pichert; Laura Van t'veer; Nadine Tung; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Fergus J Couch; Wendy S Rubinstein; Patricia A Ganz; Mary B Daly; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Gail Tomlinson; Joellen Schildkraut; Joanne L Blum; Timothy R Rebbeck Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Katrina F Trivers; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Jacqueline W Miller; Barbara Matthews; C Holly A Andrilla; Denise M Lishner; Barbara A Goff Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-07-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: C Lerman; B Biesecker; J L Benkendorf; J Kerner; A Gomez-Caminero; C Hughes; M M Reed Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1997-01-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marijke R Wevers; Margreet G E M Ausems; Senno Verhoef; Eveline M A Bleiker; Daniela E E Hahn; Frans B L Hogervorst; Rob B van der Luijt; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Richard van Hillegersberg; Emiel J T H Rutgers; Neil K Aaronson Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2011-01-10 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Lisa Madlensky; Angela M Trepanier; Deborah Cragun; Barbara Lerner; Kristen M Shannon; Heather Zierhut Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: G Cicero; R De Luca; P Dorangricchia; G Lo Coco; C Guarnaccia; D Fanale; V Calò; A Russo Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Marijke R Wevers; Margreet G E M Ausems; Senno Verhoef; Eveline M A Bleiker; Daniela E E Hahn; Titia Brouwer; Frans B L Hogervorst; Rob B van der Luijt; Thijs van Dalen; Evert B Theunissen; Bart van Ooijen; Marnix A de Roos; Paul J Borgstein; Bart C Vrouenraets; Eline Vriens; Wim H Bouma; Herman Rijna; Johannes P Vente; Jacobien M Kieffer; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Arjen J Witkamp; Neil K Aaronson Journal: Genet Med Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Hildegunn Høberg-Vetti; Cathrine Bjorvatn; Bent E Fiane; Turid Aas; Kathrine Woie; Helge Espelid; Tone Rusken; Hans Petter Eikesdal; Wenche Listøl; Marianne T Haavind; Per M Knappskog; Bjørn Ivar Haukanes; Vidar M Steen; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Shannon M Blee; Rachel Pocock Shah; Ana P M Pinheiro; Jeffrey Switchenko; Margie Dixon; Taofeek K Owonikoko; Charles E Hill; Stephen M Szabo; Rebecca D Pentz Journal: Oncologist Date: 2021-08-24