Literature DB >> 28357778

Impact of Panel Gene Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer on Patients.

Heidi S Lumish1, Hallie Steinfeld1, Carrie Koval2, Donna Russo2, Elana Levinson2, Julia Wynn2, James Duong3, Wendy K Chung4,5.   

Abstract

Recent advances in next generation sequencing have enabled panel gene testing, or simultaneous testing for mutations in multiple genes for a clinical condition. With more extensive and widespread genetic testing, there will be increased detection of genes with moderate penetrance without established clinical guidelines and of variants of uncertain significance (VUS), or genetic variants unknown to either be disease-causing or benign. This study surveyed 232 patients who underwent genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer to examine the impact of panel gene testing on psychological outcomes, patient understanding, and utilization of genetic information. The survey used standardized instruments including the Impact of Event Scale (IES), Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA), Satisfaction with Decision Instrument (SWD), Ambiguity Tolerance Scale (AT-20), genetics knowledge, and utilization of genetic test results. Study results suggested that unaffected individuals with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer who received positive results were most significantly impacted by intrusive thoughts, avoidance, and distress. However, scores were also modestly elevated among unaffected patients with a family history of breast and ovarian cancer who received VUS, highlighting the impact of ambiguous results that are frequent among patients undergoing genetic testing with large panels of genes. Potential risk factors for increased genetic testing-specific distress in this study included younger age, black or African American race, Hispanic origin, lower education level, and lower genetic knowledge and highlight the need for developing strategies to provide effective counseling and education to these communities, particularly when genetic testing utilizes gene panels that more commonly return VUS. More detailed pre-test education and counseling may help patients appreciate the probability of various types of test results and how results would be used clinically, and allow them to make more informed decisions about the type of genetic testing to select.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Cancer genetics; Genetic counseling; Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility; Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer; MICRA; Panel gene testing

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28357778      PMCID: PMC7250529          DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0090-y

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


  45 in total

Review 1.  Clinical practice. Management of an inherited predisposition to breast cancer.

Authors:  Mark Robson; Kenneth Offit
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-07-12       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Genomic medicine: a decade of successes, challenges, and opportunities.

Authors:  Jeanette J McCarthy; Howard L McLeod; Geoffrey S Ginsburg
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 17.956

3.  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

4.  Incidence of gastric cancer and breast cancer in CDH1 (E-cadherin) mutation carriers from hereditary diffuse gastric cancer families.

Authors:  P D Pharoah; P Guilford; C Caldas
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 22.682

5.  A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire.

Authors:  David Cella; Chanita Hughes; Amy Peterman; Chih-Hung Chang; Beth N Peshkin; Marc D Schwartz; Lari Wenzel; Amy Lemke; Alfred C Marcus; Caryn Lerman
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.267

6.  Frequency and spectrum of cancers in the Peutz-Jeghers syndrome.

Authors:  Nicholas Hearle; Valérie Schumacher; Fred H Menko; Sylviane Olschwang; Lisa A Boardman; Johan J P Gille; Josbert J Keller; Anne Marie Westerman; Rodney J Scott; Wendy Lim; Jill D Trimbath; Francis M Giardiello; Stephen B Gruber; G Johan A Offerhaus; Felix W M de Rooij; J H Paul Wilson; Anika Hansmann; Gabriela Möslein; Brigitte Royer-Pokora; Tilman Vogel; Robin K S Phillips; Allan D Spigelman; Richard S Houlston
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  A Systematic Comparison of Traditional and Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Genes in More Than 1000 Patients.

Authors:  Stephen E Lincoln; Yuya Kobayashi; Michael J Anderson; Shan Yang; Andrea J Desmond; Meredith A Mills; Geoffrey B Nilsen; Kevin B Jacobs; Federico A Monzon; Allison W Kurian; James M Ford; Leif W Ellisen
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 8.  Survivorship considerations in adults with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome: state of the science.

Authors:  Cheryl B Crotser; Marcia Boehmke
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 4.442

Review 9.  A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing.

Authors:  Jodi T Heshka; Crystal Palleschi; Heather Howley; Brenda Wilson; Philip S Wells
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology.

Authors:  Sue Richards; Nazneen Aziz; Sherri Bale; David Bick; Soma Das; Julie Gastier-Foster; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri Hegde; Elaine Lyon; Elaine Spector; Karl Voelkerding; Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  38 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness evaluation of pre-counseling telephone interviews before face-to-face genetic counseling in cancer genetics.

Authors:  Gaëlle Collet; Nathalie Parodi; Kevin Cassinari; Zoe Neviere; Fanny Cohen; Céline Gasnier; Afane Brahimi; François Lecoquierre; Jean-Christophe Thery; Isabelle Tennevet; Elodie Lacaze; Pascaline Berthet; Thierry Frebourg
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.375

2.  Anxiety and Hereditary Testing Results.

Authors:  Steven Sorscher
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone vs In-Person Disclosure of Germline Cancer Genetic Test Results.

Authors:  Angela R Bradbury; Linda J Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Michael J Hall; Susan M Domchek; Mary B Daly; Pamela Ganschow; Generosa Grana; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Dominique Fetzer; Amanda Brandt; Rachelle Chambers; Dana F Clark; Andrea Forman; Rikki Gaber; Cassandra Gulden; Janice Horte; Jessica M Long; Terra Lucas; Shreshtha Madaan; Kristin Mattie; Danielle McKenna; Susan Montgomery; Sarah Nielsen; Jacquelyn Powers; Kim Rainey; Christina Rybak; Michelle Savage; Christina Seelaus; Jessica Stoll; Jill E Stopfer; Xinxin Shirley Yao
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Patients' Medical and Psychosocial Experiences After Detection of a CDH1 Variant With Multigene Panel Testing.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Jessica M Long; Amanda C Brandt; Jamie Brower; Heather Symecko; Erin E Salo-Mullen; Stephanie N Christian; Tricia Harstad; Fergus J Couch; Judy E Garber; Kenneth Offit; Mark E Robson; Susan M Domchek
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2019-03-28

5.  Diagnostic exome sequencing in children: A survey of parental understanding, experience and psychological impact.

Authors:  J Wynn; R Ottman; J Duong; A L Wilson; P Ahimaz; J Martinez; R Rabin; E Rosen; R Webster; C Au; M T Cho; C Egan; E Guzman; M Primiano; J E Shaw; R Sisson; R L Klitzman; P S Appelbaum; U Lichter-Konecki; K Anyane-Yeboa; A Iglesias; W K Chung
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 6.  Patients' views on variants of uncertain significance across indications.

Authors:  Kristin Clift; Sarah Macklin; Colin Halverson; Jennifer B McCormick; Abd Moain Abu Dabrh; Stephanie Hines
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2019-08-20

7.  Impact of Receiving Secondary Results from Genomic Research: A 12-Month Longitudinal Study.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; Josue Martinez; Jessica Bulafka; Jimmy Duong; Yuan Zhang; Codruta Chiuzan; Jain Preti; Maria L Cremona; Vaidehi Jobanputra; Abby J Fyer; Robert L Klitzman; Paul S Appelbaum; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 2.537

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.  Psychosocial and behavioral outcomes of genomic testing in cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tatiane Yanes; Amanda M Willis; Bettina Meiser; Katherine M Tucker; Megan Best
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Psychosocial impact of BRCA testing in young Black breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Brian D Gonzalez; Aasha I Hoogland; Monica L Kasting; Deborah Cragun; Jongphil Kim; Kimlin Ashing; Cheryl L Holt; Chanita Hughes Halbert; Tuya Pal; Susan T Vadaparampil
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 3.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.