BACKGROUND: Although BRCA1/2 genetic testing is discouraged in minors, mothers may disclose their own results to their children. Factors affecting patients' disclosure decisions and patient outcomes of disclosure are largely unknown. METHODS: Mothers (N = 221) of children aged 8 to 21 years enrolled in this prospective study of family communication about cancer genetic testing. Patients underwent BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing, and completed standardized behavioral assessments before and 1-month following receipt of their results. RESULTS: Most patients (62.4%) disclosed BRCA1/2 test results to their child. Patients were more likely to disclose if they received negative or uninformative versus positive results [OR = 3.11; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-8.71; P = .03], their child was 13 years of age or more versus younger (OR = 5.43; 95% CI, 2.18-13.53; P < .001), and as the ratio of patients' perceived benefits of disclosure outweighed potential risks (OR = 2.40; 95% CI, 1.63-3.54; P < .001). Postdecision satisfaction about disclosure was lowest among nondisclosing patients (P < .001) and those reporting greater decisional conflict (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients commonly discuss their BRCA1/2 results with their teenage and young adult children, especially if the information is perceived as beneficial. Satisfaction with disclosure decision making remains lowest among nondisclosing and conflicted patients. Family communication decision support adjuncts to genetic counseling are needed to help ameliorate these effects. IMPACT: This study describes the prevalence of family communication about maternal BRCA1/2 genetic testing with minor children, and decisions and outcomes of disclosure.
BACKGROUND: Although BRCA1/2 genetic testing is discouraged in minors, mothers may disclose their own results to their children. Factors affecting patients' disclosure decisions and patient outcomes of disclosure are largely unknown. METHODS: Mothers (N = 221) of children aged 8 to 21 years enrolled in this prospective study of family communication about cancer genetic testing. Patients underwent BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing, and completed standardized behavioral assessments before and 1-month following receipt of their results. RESULTS: Most patients (62.4%) disclosed BRCA1/2 test results to their child. Patients were more likely to disclose if they received negative or uninformative versus positive results [OR = 3.11; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-8.71; P = .03], their child was 13 years of age or more versus younger (OR = 5.43; 95% CI, 2.18-13.53; P < .001), and as the ratio of patients' perceived benefits of disclosure outweighed potential risks (OR = 2.40; 95% CI, 1.63-3.54; P < .001). Postdecision satisfaction about disclosure was lowest among nondisclosing patients (P < .001) and those reporting greater decisional conflict (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients commonly discuss their BRCA1/2 results with their teenage and young adult children, especially if the information is perceived as beneficial. Satisfaction with disclosure decision making remains lowest among nondisclosing and conflicted patients. Family communication decision support adjuncts to genetic counseling are needed to help ameliorate these effects. IMPACT: This study describes the prevalence of family communication about maternal BRCA1/2 genetic testing with minor children, and decisions and outcomes of disclosure.
Authors: J Zabora; K BrintzenhofeSzoc; P Jacobsen; B Curbow; S Piantadosi; C Hooker; A Owens; L Derogatis Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2001 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Catharine Wang; Suzanne M O'Neill; Nan Rothrock; Robert Gramling; Ananda Sen; Louise S Acheson; Wendy S Rubinstein; Donald E Nease; Mack T Ruffin Journal: Prev Med Date: 2008-11-25 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Kenneth P Tercyak; Beth N Peshkin; Tiffani A Demarco; Andrea Farkas Patenaude; Katherine A Schneider; Judy E Garber; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Marc D Schwartz Journal: Genet Test Date: 2007
Authors: Angela R Bradbury; James J Dignam; Comfort N Ibe; Sogyong L Auh; Fay J Hlubocky; Shelly A Cummings; Melody White; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Christopher K Daugherty Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Lisa Schwartz; Brian Egleston; Colleen Burke Sands; Wendy K Chung; Gord Glendon; Jasmine A McDonald; Cynthia Moore; Paula Rauch; Lisa Tuchman; Irene L Andrulis; Saundra S Buys; Caren J Frost; Theresa H M Keegan; Julia A Knight; Mary Beth Terry; Esther M John; Mary B Daly Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Alison L Young; Phyllis N Butow; Janine Vetsch; Veronica F Quinn; Andrea F Patenaude; Katherine M Tucker; Claire E Wakefield Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Claire C Conley; Dana Ketcher; Maija Reblin; Monica L Kasting; Deborah Cragun; Jongphil Kim; Kimlin Tam Ashing; Cheryl L Knott; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Tuya Pal; Susan T Vadaparampil Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Cristiane S Duarte; Ruth Eisenberg; George J Musa; Amanda Addolorato; Sa Shen; Christina W Hoven Journal: J Child Adolesc Trauma Date: 2017-07-05
Authors: Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Lisa A Schwartz; Brian L Egleston; Dare Henry-Moss; Susan M Domchek; Mary B Daly; Lisa Tuchman; Cynthia Moore; Paula K Rauch; Rebecca Shorter; Kelsey Karpink; Colleen Burke Sands Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-08-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kenneth P Tercyak; Suzanne M Bronheim; Nicole Kahn; Hillary A Robertson; Bruno J Anthony; Darren Mays; Suzanne C O'Neill; Susan K Peterson; Susan Miesfeldt; Beth N Peshkin; Tiffani A DeMarco Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Suzanne C O'Neill; Darren Mays; Andrea Farkas Patenaude; Judy E Garber; Tiffani A DeMarco; Beth N Peshkin; Katherine A Schneider; Kenneth P Tercyak Journal: J Community Genet Date: 2014-08-07