BACKGROUND: Recent advances in schizophrenia genetics are shedding new light on etiopathogenesis, but issues germane to translation of findings into clinical practice are relatively understudied. We assessed the need for, and efficacy of, a contemporary genetic counseling protocol for individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: After characterizing rare copy number variation in a cohort of adults with schizophrenia, we recruited subjects from the majority of individuals who had no clinically relevant structural genetic variant. We used a pre-post study design with longitudinal follow-up to assess both the profile of need and the impact of general genetic counseling on key knowledge-based and psychological factors. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (60.0%) of 65 patients approached actively expressed an interest in the study. At baseline, participants (n = 25) tended to overestimate the risk of familial recurrence of schizophrenia, express considerable concern related to this perceived risk, endorse myths about schizophrenia etiology, and blame themselves for their illness. Postcounseling, there was a significant improvement in understanding of the empiric recurrence risk (P = .0090), accompanied by a decrease in associated concern (P = .0020). There were also significant gains in subjective (P = .0007) and objective (P = .0103) knowledge, and reductions in internalized stigma (P = .0111) and self-blame (P = .0401). Satisfaction with genetic counseling, including endorsement of the need for such counseling (86.4%), was high. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide initial evidence of need for, and efficacy of, genetic counseling for individuals with schizophrenia. The findings may help facilitate development of a contemporary genetic counseling process that could optimize outcomes in the nascent field of evidence-based psychiatric genetic counseling.
BACKGROUND: Recent advances in schizophrenia genetics are shedding new light on etiopathogenesis, but issues germane to translation of findings into clinical practice are relatively understudied. We assessed the need for, and efficacy of, a contemporary genetic counseling protocol for individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: After characterizing rare copy number variation in a cohort of adults with schizophrenia, we recruited subjects from the majority of individuals who had no clinically relevant structural genetic variant. We used a pre-post study design with longitudinal follow-up to assess both the profile of need and the impact of general genetic counseling on key knowledge-based and psychological factors. RESULTS: Thirty-nine (60.0%) of 65 patients approached actively expressed an interest in the study. At baseline, participants (n = 25) tended to overestimate the risk of familial recurrence of schizophrenia, express considerable concern related to this perceived risk, endorse myths about schizophrenia etiology, and blame themselves for their illness. Postcounseling, there was a significant improvement in understanding of the empiric recurrence risk (P = .0090), accompanied by a decrease in associated concern (P = .0020). There were also significant gains in subjective (P = .0007) and objective (P = .0103) knowledge, and reductions in internalized stigma (P = .0111) and self-blame (P = .0401). Satisfaction with genetic counseling, including endorsement of the need for such counseling (86.4%), was high. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide initial evidence of need for, and efficacy of, genetic counseling for individuals with schizophrenia. The findings may help facilitate development of a contemporary genetic counseling process that could optimize outcomes in the nascent field of evidence-based psychiatric genetic counseling.
Entities:
Keywords:
copy number variation; genetic counseling; genetic predisposition to disease; genetics; schizophrenia; stigma
Authors: Anne S Bassett; Gregory Costain; Wai Lun Alan Fung; Kathryn J Russell; Laura Pierce; Ronak Kapadia; Ronald F Carter; Eva W C Chow; Pamela J Forsythe Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Paul Lichtenstein; Camilla Björk; Christina M Hultman; Edward Scolnick; Pamela Sklar; Patrick F Sullivan Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2006-07-25 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Gregory Costain; Mary Jane Esplen; Brenda Toner; Kathleen A Hodgkinson; Anne S Bassett Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2012-10-27 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Christine T Finn; Marsha A Wilcox; Bruce R Korf; Deborah Blacker; Stephanie R Racette; Pamela Sklar; Jordan W Smoller Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Jehannine C Austin; Christina G S Palmer; Beth Rosen-Sheidley; Patricia McCarthy Veach; Elizabeth Gettig; Holly L Peay Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2007-12-11 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Anna C Need; Joseph P McEvoy; Massimo Gennarelli; Erin L Heinzen; Dongliang Ge; Jessica M Maia; Kevin V Shianna; Min He; Elizabeth T Cirulli; Curtis E Gumbs; Qian Zhao; C Ryan Campbell; Linda Hong; Peter Rosenquist; Anu Putkonen; Tero Hallikainen; Eila Repo-Tiihonen; Jari Tiihonen; Deborah L Levy; Herbert Y Meltzer; David B Goldstein Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Gregory Costain; Anath C Lionel; Daniele Merico; Pamela Forsythe; Kathryn Russell; Chelsea Lowther; Tracy Yuen; Janice Husted; Dimitri J Stavropoulos; Marsha Speevak; Eva W C Chow; Christian R Marshall; Stephen W Scherer; Anne S Bassett Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2013-06-27 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Gregory Costain; Anath C Lionel; Fiona Fu; Dimitri J Stavropoulos; Matthew J Gazzellone; Christian R Marshall; Stephen W Scherer; Anne S Bassett Journal: Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet Date: 2014-05-08 Impact factor: 3.568
Authors: Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz; Maya Sabatello; Laura Huckins; Holly Peay; Franziska Degenhardt; Bettina Meiser; Todd Lencz; Takahiro Soda; Anna Docherty; David Crepaz-Keay; Jehannine Austin; Roseann E Peterson; Lea K Davis Journal: Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 3.568