Literature DB >> 24072553

Comparison of attitudes regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis among patients with hereditary cancer syndromes.

Thereasa A Rich1, Mei Liu, Carol J Etzel, Sarah A Bannon, Maureen E Mork, Kaylene Ready, Devki S Saraiya, Elizabeth G Grubbs, Nancy D Perrier, Karen H Lu, Banu K Arun, Terri L Woodard, Leslie R Schover, Jennifer K Litton.   

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) allows couples to avoid having a child with an inherited condition, potentially reducing cancer burden in families with a hereditary cancer predisposition. This study investigated and compared awareness and acceptance of PGD among patients with different hereditary cancer syndromes. Questionnaires were mailed to 984 adults with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or 2. Associations between clinical, demographic, and psychosocial factors and awareness and acceptance of PGD were examined. Of 370 respondents (38 % return rate), 28 % felt their syndrome impacted family planning, 24 % were aware of PGD, 72 % felt that PGD should be offered, 43 % would consider using PGD, and 29 % were uncertain. Family experience and syndrome-specific characteristics, such as disease severity, quality of life and availability of medical interventions as well as gender, family planning stage, and religiosity impact perceptions of the acceptability of PGD, though a high level of uncertainty exists. Hereditary cancer patients lack awareness of PGD despite feeling that PGD should be offered, highlighting the need for education on this topic. While we found attitudes about the acceptability of PGD to be generally similar to those reported in the literature and of genetics and ethics experts, we observed similarities and differences between syndromes that provide insight into why some hereditary cancer patients may find PGD more acceptable than others.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24072553      PMCID: PMC4159051          DOI: 10.1007/s10689-013-9685-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Cancer        ISSN: 1389-9600            Impact factor:   2.375


  36 in total

1.  Professionals assess the acceptability of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis for managing inherited predisposition to cancer.

Authors:  Claire Julian-Reynier; Françoise Chabal; Thierry Frebourg; Didier Lemery; Catherine Noguès; Francis Puech; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-08-24       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Knowledge, attitudes, and clinical experience of physicians regarding preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes.

Authors:  Amanda C Brandt; Matthew L Tschirgi; Kaylene J Ready; Charlotte Sun; Sandra Darilek; Jacqueline Hecht; Banu K Arun; Karen H Lu
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case Series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies.

Authors:  A Antoniou; P D P Pharoah; S Narod; H A Risch; J E Eyfjord; J L Hopper; N Loman; H Olsson; O Johannsson; A Borg; B Pasini; P Radice; S Manoukian; D M Eccles; N Tang; E Olah; H Anton-Culver; E Warner; J Lubinski; J Gronwald; B Gorski; H Tulinius; S Thorlacius; H Eerola; H Nevanlinna; K Syrjäkoski; O-P Kallioniemi; D Thompson; C Evans; J Peto; F Lalloo; D G Evans; D F Easton
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-04-03       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 4.  Guidelines for diagnosis and therapy of MEN type 1 and type 2.

Authors:  M L Brandi; R F Gagel; A Angeli; J P Bilezikian; P Beck-Peccoz; C Bordi; B Conte-Devolx; A Falchetti; R G Gheri; A Libroia; C J Lips; G Lombardi; M Mannelli; F Pacini; B A Ponder; F Raue; B Skogseid; G Tamburrano; R V Thakker; N W Thompson; P Tomassetti; F Tonelli; S A Wells; S J Marx
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.958

5.  High risk men's perceptions of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil; Cheryl A Miree; Ji-Hyun Lee; Xiuhua Zhao; Susan Friedman; Susan Yi; James Mayer
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 6.  Decisions and ethical issues among BRCA carriers and the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

Authors:  G P Quinn; S T Vadaparampil; B Bower; S Friedman; D L Keefe
Journal:  Minerva Med       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.806

7.  Attitudes toward genetic testing in childhood and reproductive decision-making for familial adenomatous polyposis.

Authors:  Kirsten F L Douma; Neil K Aaronson; Hans F A Vasen; Senno Verhoef; Chad M Gundy; Eveline M A Bleiker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Conflict between values and technology: perceptions of preimplantation genetic diagnosis among women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil; Lindsey M King; Cheryl A Miree; Sue Friedman
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-06-25       Impact factor: 2.375

9.  Attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancer.

Authors:  Chantal Lammens; Eveline Bleiker; Neil Aaronson; Annette Vriends; Margreet Ausems; Maaike Jansweijer; Anja Wagner; Rolf Sijmons; Ans van den Ouweland; Rob van der Luijt; Liesbeth Spruijt; Encarna Gómez García; Mariëlle Ruijs; Senno Verhoef
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 2.375

10.  Factors associated with preimplantation genetic diagnosis acceptance among women concerned about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Susan T Vadaparampil; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Caprice Knapp; Teri L Malo; Susan Friedman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  20 in total

1.  Reproductive Decision-Making in MMR Mutation Carriers After Results Disclosure: Impact of Psychological Status in Childbearing Options.

Authors:  Jacqueline Duffour; Audrey Combes; Evelyne Crapez; Florence Boissière-Michot; Frédéric Bibeau; Pierre Senesse; Marc Ychou; Julie Courraud; Hélène de Forges; Lise Roca
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Uptake of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis in Female BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers.

Authors:  Pnina Mor; Sarah Brennenstuhl; Kelly A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 3.  Psychosocial Impact of Lynch Syndrome on Affected Individuals and Families.

Authors:  Polymnia Galiatsatos; Heidi Rothenmund; Sylvie Aubin; William D Foulkes
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Reproductive Decision-Making in Women with BRCA1/2 Mutations.

Authors:  Jessica L Chan; Lauren N C Johnson; Mary D Sammel; Laura DiGiovanni; Chan Voong; Susan M Domchek; Clarisa R Gracia
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  The Use of Social Media to Recruit Participants With Rare Conditions: Lynch Syndrome as an Example.

Authors:  Allison M Burton-Chase; Wendy M Parker; Kelsey Hennig; Faith Sisson; Linda L Bruzzone
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2017-01-23

6.  "Would you test your children without their consent?" and other sticky dilemmas in the field of cancer genetic testing.

Authors:  Karina L Brierley; Danielle C Bonadies; Anne Moyer; Ellen T Matloff
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 7.  From Initial Description by Wermer to Present-Day MEN1: What have We Learned?

Authors:  Nancy D Perrier
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Examining the Psychosocial Impact of Genetic Testing for Cardiomyopathies.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; David T Holland; Jimmy Duong; Priyanka Ahimaz; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Challenges, Dilemmas and Factors Involved in PGD Decision-Making: Providers' and Patients' Views, Experiences and Decisions.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Hereditary diseases and child wish: exploring motives, considerations, and the (joint) decision-making process of genetically at-risk couples.

Authors:  Y Severijns; C E M de Die-Smulders; T Gültzow; H de Vries; L A D M van Osch
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-02-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.