Literature DB >> 8648868

BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes.

C Lerman1, S Narod, K Schulman, C Hughes, A Gomez-Caminero, G Bonney, K Gold, B Trock, D Main, J Lynch, C Fulmore, C Snyder, S J Lemon, T Conway, P Tonin, G Lenoir, H Lynch.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of utilization of breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility (BRCA1 gene) testing and to evaluate outcomes of participation in a testing program.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with baseline interview assessment of predictor variables (eg, sociodemographic factors, knowledge about hereditary cancer and genetic testing, perceptions of testing benefits, limitations, and risks). BRCA1 test results were offered after an education and counseling session in a research setting. Outcome variables (including depression, functional health status, and prophylactic surgery plans [follow-up only]) were assessed at baseline and 1-month follow-up interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Adult male and female members (n=279) of families with BRCA1-linked hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC).
RESULTS: Of subjects who completed a baseline interview (n=192), 60% requested BRCA1 test results (43% of all study subjects requested results). Requests for results were more frequent for persons with health insurance (odds ration [OR], 3.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.06-6.80); more first-degree relatives affected with breast cancer (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.16-2.16); more knowledge about BRCA1 testing (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.36-2.50); and indicating that test benefits are important (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.13-1.86). At follow-up, noncarriers of BRCA1 mutations showed statistically significant reductions in depressive symptoms and functional impairment compared with carriers and nontested individuals. Individuals identified as mutation carriers did not exhibit increases in depression and functional impairment. Among unaffected women with no prior prophylactic surgery, 17% of carriers (2/12) intended to have mastectomies and 33% (4/12) to have oophorectomies.
CONCLUSIONS: Only a subset of HBOC family members are likely to request BRCA1 testing when available. Rates of test use may be higher in persons of a higher socioeconomic status and those with more relatives affected with breast cancer. For some high-risk individuals who receive test results in a research setting that includes counseling, there may be psychological benefits. More research is needed to assess the generalizability of these results and evaluate the long-term consequences of BRCA1 testing.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Creighton University Hereditary Cancer Institute; Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8648868

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  163 in total

1.  The choice to have a disabled child.

Authors:  S Michie; T M Marteau
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Psychological distress, health beliefs, and frequency of breast self-examination.

Authors:  J Erblich; D H Bovbjerg; H B Valdimarsdottir
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2000-06

3.  Evaluation of a counselling protocol for predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  K Aktan-Collan; J P Mecklin; A de la Chapelle; P Peltomäki; A Uutela; H Kääriäinen
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.318

4.  Whose gene is it? A case discussion about familial conflict over genetic testing for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ronald M Green; A Mathew Thomas
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 5.  Effects of communicating individual risks in screening programmes: Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  Adrian Edwards; Silvana Unigwe; Glyn Elwyn; Kerenza Hood
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

6.  Uptake of BRCA1 genetic testing in adult sisters and daughters of known mutation carriers in Norway.

Authors:  Trine Levin Bodd; Jon Reichelt; Ketil Heimdal; Pal Moller
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 7.  Methodology in longitudinal studies on psychological effects of predictive DNA testing: a review.

Authors:  R Timman; T Stijnen; A Tibben
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 6.318

Review 8.  Research issues in genetic testing of adolescents for obesity.

Authors:  Mary E Segal; Pamela Sankar; Danielle R Reed
Journal:  Nutr Rev       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 7.110

9.  Long-term reactions to genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: does time heal women's concerns?

Authors:  Chanita Hughes Halbert; Jill E Stopfer; Jasmine McDonald; Benita Weathers; Aliya Collier; Andrea B Troxel; Susan Domchek
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Breast Cancer Survivors' Knowledge of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer following Genetic Counseling: An Exploration of General and Survivor-Specific Knowledge Items.

Authors:  Courtney L Scherr; Juliette Christie; Susan T Vadaparampil
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 2.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.