Literature DB >> 27369690

Patient Recall, Interpretation, and Perspective of an Inconclusive Long QT Syndrome Genetic Test Result.

Sarah Predham1, Julie Hathaway2, Gurdip Hulait3, Laura Arbour3,2,4, Anna Lehman3,2.   

Abstract

Patients' perceptions of inconclusive results have been previously investigated in cancer genetics. The differences in how patients recall and interpret an uninformative test result compared to a known pathogenic result can affect medical decisions post disclosure. However, there is little to no data available on patients' interpretation and perception of uninformative genetic results in inherited heart disease. We report the results of a qualitative analysis of 16 telephone interviews with participants who received a negative or a variant of unknown significance (VUS) result from Long QT syndrome (LQTS) genetic testing. Our results suggest that the type of result (negative versus VUS) does not affect recall, regardless of the reason for testing. When receiving a negative result, a majority of participants appropriately perceived no change in their diagnosis, while the perception of risk for family members varied. The majority of participants felt they maintained an awareness of their condition after the result disclosure, and that clinical follow-up was similar to that planned prior to the genetic test result. Further work is needed to determine if there are any differences between obtaining a VUS result versus a negative result in this population.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetic testing; Inconclusive results; Long QT; Patient recall; Risk perception; VUS

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27369690     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-9991-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  9 in total

1.  The counsellees' view of an unclassified variant in BRCA1/2: recall, interpretation, and impact on life.

Authors:  Joël Vos; Wilma Otten; Christi van Asperen; Anna Jansen; Fred Menko; Aad Tibben
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.894

Review 2.  The QT syndromes: long and short.

Authors:  Hiroshi Morita; Jiashin Wu; Douglas P Zipes
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2008-08-30       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Prevalence of the congenital long-QT syndrome.

Authors:  Peter J Schwartz; Marco Stramba-Badiale; Lia Crotti; Matteo Pedrazzini; Alessandra Besana; Giuliano Bosi; Fulvio Gabbarini; Karine Goulene; Roberto Insolia; Savina Mannarino; Fabio Mosca; Luigi Nespoli; Alessandro Rimini; Enrico Rosati; Patrizia Salice; Carla Spazzolini
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-10-19       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  Psychological issues in genetic testing for inherited cardiovascular diseases.

Authors:  Rajani D Aatre; Sharlene M Day
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Genet       Date:  2011-02

5.  Variants of uncertain clinical significance as a result of BRCA1/2 testing: impact of an ambiguous breast cancer risk message.

Authors:  Sandra van Dijk; Christi J van Asperen; Catharina E Jacobi; Geraldine R Vink; Aad Tibben; Martijn H Breuning; Wilma Otten
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2004

6.  Impediments to DNA testing and cascade screening for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and Long QT syndrome: a qualitative study of patient experiences.

Authors:  Andrew Smart
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Reduced Uptake of Family Screening in Genotype-Negative Versus Genotype-Positive Long QT Syndrome.

Authors:  Mikael Hanninen; George J Klein; Zachary Laksman; Susan S Conacher; Allan C Skanes; Raymond Yee; Lorne J Gula; Peter Leong-Sit; Jaimie Manlucu; Andrew D Krahn
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 8.  Recommendations for the use of genetic testing in the clinical evaluation of inherited cardiac arrhythmias associated with sudden cardiac death: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Heart Rhythm Society joint position paper.

Authors:  Michael H Gollob; Louis Blier; Ramon Brugada; Jean Champagne; Vijay Chauhan; Sean Connors; Martin Gardner; Martin S Green; Robert Gow; Robert Hamilton; Louise Harris; Jeff S Healey; Kathleen Hodgkinson; Christina Honeywell; Michael Kantoch; Joel Kirsh; Andrew Krahn; Michelle Mullen; Ratika Parkash; Damian Redfearn; Julie Rutberg; Shubhayan Sanatani; Anna Woo
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.223

Review 9.  Genetic testing in the management of inherited arrhythmia syndromes.

Authors:  Wendy S Tzou; Edward P Gerstenfeld
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.931

  9 in total
  4 in total

1.  Experience of Asian males communicating cardiac genetic risk within the family.

Authors:  Sylvia Kam; Yasmin Bylstra; Laura Forrest; Ivan Macciocca; Roger Foo
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2018-01-08

2.  Perceptions of genetic variant reclassification in patients with inherited cardiac disease.

Authors:  Eugene K Wong; Kirsten Bartels; Julie Hathaway; Charlotte Burns; Laura Yeates; Christopher Semsarian; Andrew D Krahn; Alice Virani; Jodie Ingles
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Discovery of over 200 new and expanded genetic conditions using GeneMatcher.

Authors:  K McWalter; E Torti; M Morrow; J Juusola; K Retterer
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2022-02-27       Impact factor: 4.700

4.  Clinical and psychological outcomes of receiving a variant of uncertain significance from multigene panel testing or genomic sequencing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chloe Mighton; Salma Shickh; Elizabeth Uleryk; Petros Pechlivanoglou; Yvonne Bombard
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 8.822

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.