Literature DB >> 25223899

Parent decision-making around the genetic testing of children for germline TP53 mutations.

Melissa A Alderfer1, Kristin Zelley, Robert B Lindell, Ana Novokmet, Phuong L Mai, Judy E Garber, Deepika Nathan, Sarah Scollon, Nicolette M Chun, Andrea F Patenaude, James M Ford, Sharon E Plon, Joshua D Schiffman, Lisa R Diller, Sharon A Savage, David Malkin, Carol A Ford, Kim E Nichols.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Li-Fraumeni syndrome is a rare genetic cancer predisposition syndrome caused by germline TP53 mutations. Up to 20% of mutation carriers develop cancer during childhood. The benefits of TP53 mutation testing of children are a matter of debate and knowledge of parent decision-making around such testing is limited. The current study examined how parents make decisions regarding TP53 testing for their children.
METHODS: Families offered and those pursuing TP53 testing for their children were identified across the study sites. Qualitative interviews with 46 parents (39 families) were analyzed to describe decision-making styles and perceived advantages and disadvantages of testing.
RESULTS: TP53 mutation testing uptake was high (92%). Three decision-making styles emerged. Automatic decisions (44% of decisions) involved little thought and identified immediate benefit(s) in testing (100% pursued testing). Considered decisions (49%) weighed the risks and benefits but were made easily (77% pursued testing). Deliberated decisions (6%) were difficult and focused on psychosocial concerns (25% pursued testing). Perceived advantages of testing included promoting child health, satisfying a "need to know," understanding why cancer(s) occurred, suggesting family member risk, and benefiting research. Disadvantages included psychosocial risks and privacy/discrimination/insurance issues.
CONCLUSIONS: Although empirical evidence regarding the benefits and risks of TP53 testing during childhood are lacking, the majority of parents in the current study decided easily in favor of testing and perceived a range of advantages. The authors conclude that in the context of a clinical diagnosis of Li-Fraumeni syndrome, parents should continue to be offered TP53 testing for their children, counseled regarding potential risks and benefits, and supported in their decision-making process.
© 2014 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Li-Fraumeni syndrome; cancer; decision-making; genetic testing; pediatrics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25223899     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  14 in total

Review 1.  Ethical conundrums in pediatric genomics.

Authors:  Seth J Rotz; Eric Kodish
Journal:  Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program       Date:  2018-11-30

2.  Consumer attitudes towards the establishment of a national Australian familial cancer research database by the Inherited Cancer Connect (ICCon) Partnership.

Authors:  Laura Forrest; Gillian Mitchell; Letitia Thrupp; Lara Petelin; Kate Richardson; Lyon Mascarenhas; Mary-Anne Young
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-08-18

3.  Family Health Leaders: Lessons on Living with Li-Fraumeni Syndrome across Generations.

Authors:  Ashley Pantaleao; Jennifer L Young; Norman B Epstein; Mae Carlson; Renée C Bremer; Payal P Khincha; June A Peters; Mark H Greene; Kevin Roy; Maria Isabel Achatz; Sharon A Savage; Allison Werner-Lin
Journal:  Fam Process       Date:  2019-10-24

4.  Uptake of Predictive Genetic Testing and Cardiac Evaluation for Children at Risk for an Inherited Arrhythmia or Cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Susan Christian; Joseph Atallah; Robin Clegg; Michael Giuffre; Cathleen Huculak; Tara Dzwiniel; Jillian Parboosingh; Sherryl Taylor; Martin Somerville
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Parents' interest in genetic testing of their offspring in multiplex epilepsy families.

Authors:  Courtney B Caminiti; Dale C Hesdorffer; Sara Shostak; Jeff Goldsmith; Shawn T Sorge; Melodie R Winawer; Jo C Phelan; Wendy K Chung; Ruth Ottman
Journal:  Epilepsia       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 5.864

6.  Should Genetic Testing be Offered for Children? The Perspectives of Adolescents and Emerging Adults in Families with Li-Fraumeni Syndrome.

Authors:  Melissa A Alderfer; Robert B Lindell; Claire I Viadro; Kristin Zelley; Jessica Valdez; Belinda Mandrell; Carol A Ford; Kim E Nichols
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  The Influence of Adolescence on Parents' Perspectives of Testing and Discussing Inherited Cancer Predisposition.

Authors:  Corinna L Schultz; Melissa A Alderfer; Robert B Lindell; Zachary McClain; Kristin Zelley; Kim E Nichols; Carol A Ford
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-16       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 8.  Hereditary gastrointestinal cancer.

Authors:  Keisuke Hata; Yoko Yamamoto; Tomomichi Kiyomatsu; Toshiaki Tanaka; Shinsuke Kazama; Hiroaki Nozawa; Kazushige Kawai; Junichiro Tanaka; Takeshi Nishikawa; Kensuke Otani; Koji Yasuda; Junko Kishikawa; Yuzo Nagai; Hiroyuki Anzai; Takahide Shinagawa; Keiichi Arakawa; Hironori Yamaguchi; Soichiro Ishihara; Eiji Sunami; Joji Kitayama; Toshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 9.  Cancer Genetic Counseling-Current Practice and Future Challenges.

Authors:  Jaclyn Schienda; Jill Stopfer
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 5.159

10.  Factors Associated with Declining to Participate in a Pediatric Oncology Next Generation Sequencing Study.

Authors:  Katianne M Howard Sharp; Niki Jurbergs; Annastasia Ouma; Lynn Harrison; Elsie Gerhardt; Leslie Taylor; Kayla Hamilton; Rose B McGee; Regina Nuccio; Emily Quinn; Stacy Hines-Dowell; Chimene Kesserwan; Anusha Sunkara; Jami S Gattuso; Michelle Pritchard; Belinda Mandrell; Mary V Relling; Cyrine E Haidar; Guolian Kang; Liza M Johnson; Kim E Nichols
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2020-03-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.