Search

Purpose: The ongoing integration of cancer genomic testing into routine clinical care has led to increased demand for cancer genetic services. To meet this demand, there is an urgent need to enhance the accessibility and reach of such services, while ensuring comparable care delivery outcomes. This randomized trial compared 1-year outcomes for telephone genetic counseling with in-person counseling among women at risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer living in geographically diverse areas., Patients and Methods: Using population-based sampling, women at increased risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to in-person (n = 495) or telephone genetic counseling (n = 493). One-sided 97.5% CIs were used to estimate the noninferiority effects of telephone counseling on 1-year psychosocial, decision-making, and quality-of-life outcomes. Differences in test-uptake proportions for determining equivalency of a 10% prespecified margin were evaluated by 95% CIs., Results: At the 1-year follow-up, telephone counseling was noninferior to in-person counseling for all psychosocial and informed decision-making outcomes: anxiety (difference [d], 0.08; upper bound 97.5% CI, 0.45), cancer-specific distress (d, 0.66; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.28), perceived personal control (d, -0.01; lower bound 97.5% CI, -0.06), and decisional conflict (d, -0.12; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.03). Test uptake was lower for telephone counseling (27.9%) than in-person counseling (37.3%), with the difference of 9.4% (95% CI, 2.2% to 16.8%). Uptake was appreciably higher for rural compared with urban dwellers in both counseling arms., Conclusion: Although telephone counseling led to lower testing uptake, our findings suggest that telephone counseling can be effectively used to increase reach and access without long-term adverse psychosocial consequences. Further work is needed to determine long-term adherence to risk management guidelines and effective strategies to boost utilization of primary and secondary preventive strategies., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk has been associated with positive outcomes in high risk women. However, little is known about how patients perceive TC. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus usual care (UC; in-person genetic counseling), we compared high risk women's perceptions of: (1) overall satisfaction with genetic counseling; (2) convenience; (3) attentiveness during the session; (4) counselor effectiveness in providing support; and (5) counselor ability to recognize emotional responses during the session. Among the 554 participants (TC, N = 272; UC, N = 282), delivery mode was not associated with self-reported satisfaction. However, TC participants found counseling significantly more convenient than UC participants (OR = 4.78, 95 % CI = 3.32, 6.89) while also perceiving lower levels of support (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.40-0.80) and emotional recognition (OR = 0.53, 95 % CI = 0.37-0.76). In exploratory analyses, we found that non-Hispanic white participants reported higher counselor support in UC than in TC (69.4 % vs. 52.8 %; OR = 3.06, 95 % CI = 1.39-6.74), while minority women perceived less support in UC vs. TC (58.3 % vs. 38.7 %; OR = 0.80, 95 % CI = 0.39-1.65). We discuss potential research and practice implications of these findings which may further improve the effectiveness and utilization of TC.

Purpose: BRCA1/2 counseling and mutation testing is recommended for high-risk women, but geographic barriers exist, and no data on the costs and yields of diverse delivery approaches are available., Methods: We performed an economic evaluation with a randomized clinical trial comparing telephone versus in-person counseling at 14 locations (nine geographically remote). Costs included fixed overhead, variable staff, and patient time costs; research costs were excluded. Outcomes included average per-person costs for pretest counseling; mutations detected; and overall counseling, testing, and disclosure. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of uncertainty., Results: In-person counseling was more costly per person counseled than was telephone counseling ($270 [range, $180 to $400] v $120 [range, $80 to $200], respectively). Counselors averaged 285 miles round-trip to deliver in-person counseling to the participants (three participants per session). There were no differences by arm in mutation detection rates (approximately 10%); therefore, telephone counseling was less costly per positive mutation detected than was in-person counseling ($37,160 [range, $36,080 to$38,920] v $40,330 [range, $38,010 to $43,870]). In-person counseling would only be less costly than telephone counseling if the most favorable assumptions were applied to in personc ounseling and the least favorable assumptions were applied to telephone counseling., Conclusion: In geographically underserved areas, telephone counseling is less costly than in-person counseling., (Copyright © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Importance: BRCA genetic testing has substantial public health impact, yet little is known of the real-world experiences of the more than 100 000 Americans undergoing testing annually., Objective: To identify factors associated with use of BRCA testing, assess whether delivery of genetic counseling and testing services adheres to professional guidelines, and measure the impact on patient-reported outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: The American BRCA Outcomes and Utilization of Testing (ABOUT) Study analyzed data from a consecutive national series of 11 159 women whose clinicians ordered BRCA testing between December 2011 and December 2012. Aetna mailed recruitment information across the United States to commercial health plan members whose clinicians had ordered BRCA testing. A total of 3874 women (34.7%) completed questionnaires. Deidentified clinician-reported data from all respondents and a random sample of 2613 nonrespondents were also analyzed., Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of eligible participants who met testing criteria and respondents' report of receiving genetic counseling by a genetics clinician and its association with BRCA knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction were assessed., Results: Among 3628 women respondents whose clinicians ordered comprehensive BRCA testing, most were white non-Hispanic (2502 [69.0%]), college educated (2953 [81.4%]), married (2751 [75.8%]), and had higher incomes (2011 [55.4%]). Approximately 16.4% (596) did not meet testing criteria. Mutations were identified in 161 (5.3%) of these women who received comprehensive testing. Only 1334 (36.8%) reported receiving genetic counseling from a genetics clinician prior to testing; the lowest rates (130 [12.3%]) were among patients of obstetrician/gynecologists. The most commonly reported reason for not receiving this clinical service was lack of clinician recommendation. Those who received it demonstrated greater knowledge about BRCA (mean score difference adjusted for demographics and clinician specialty, β = 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.14]; P < .001) and expressed greater understanding (β = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41-0.54]; P < .001) and satisfaction (β = 2.21 [95% CI, 1.60-2.81]; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Despite improved patient knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction among patients who receive genetic counseling provided by a genetics clinician, as well as multiple guidelines emphasizing the importance of genetic counseling, most US women undergoing BRCA genetic testing do not receive this clinical service. Lack of physician recommendation is the most commonly reported reason. These findings demonstrate important gaps in clinical genetics services. Recently mandated coverage of genetic counseling services as a preventive service without patient cost sharing should contribute to improving clinical genetics services and associated outcomes in the future.

Purpose: As genetic counseling and testing become more fully integrated into clinical care, alternative delivery models are increasingly prominent. This study examines predictors of genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer among high-risk women in a randomized trial of in-person versus telephone-based genetic counseling., Methods: Methods include multivariable logistic regression and interaction analyses., Results: Of the 669 participants, 600 completed counseling and 523 received test results. As previously reported, participants randomized to telephone counseling were significantly less likely to be tested. In intention-to-treat analyses, completion of counseling and testing was associated with: race/ethnicity (odds ratio (OR) = 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-3.20), perceived stress (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98), knowledge (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02-1.23), and randomization group (OR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.01-2.16). Further, race/ethnicity moderated the association between randomization group and testing; minority women receiving telephone counseling were least likely to complete testing., Conclusion: Evidence for logistical and communication-based explanations for this interaction is presented. The overall increased access made possible with telephone genetic counseling should be considered in light of the possibility that this may also lead to lower rates of testing among high-risk minority women. Additional care should be taken to assess and address potential barriers when services are delivered by telephone.Genet Med 17 6, 467-475.

Objective: Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility is now part of routine clinical practice. Although rates of risk-reducing surgery following genetic testing have been increasing, little is known about attitudes toward risk-reducing surgery in women prior to genetic counseling and testing. This study examines correlates of patient intentions to undergo risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and risk-reducing oophorectomy (RRO)., Methods: Participants were 696 women, ages 21-85, who sought breast cancer gene 1 and 2 (BRCA1/2) genetic counseling and had at least a 10% risk of carrying a mutation. The sample included women who were affected with breast or ovarian cancer and unaffected women with a known familial BRCA1/2 mutation. Participants completed a precounseling telephone questionnaire., Results: Prior to receiving genetic counseling, 23.3% of participants were considering RRM and 42.5% were considering RRO. Variables that were independently associated with RRM intentions were cancer-specific distress (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.03-1.26), perceived risk of breast cancer (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.05-1.28), education (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.03-2.99), and age (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.95-0.98). Predictors of RRO intentions were perceived risk for ovarian cancer (OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.14-1.37), perceived risk of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation (OR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.15-2.62), marital status (OR = 1.92, 95% CI = 1.34-2.76), and age (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.00-1.03)., Conclusions: Because precounseling intentions predict subsequent risk-reducing surgery decisions, this study identified patient factors associated with surgical intentions. These factors reinforce the critical role for pretest genetic counseling in communicating accurate risk estimates and management options, and addressing psychosocial concerns, to facilitate informed decision making regarding RRM and RRO., (Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: The growing demand for cancer genetic services underscores the need to consider approaches that enhance access and efficiency of genetic counseling. Telephone delivery of cancer genetic services may improve access to these services for individuals experiencing geographic (rural areas) and structural (travel time, transportation, childcare) barriers to access., Methods: This cluster-randomized clinical trial used population-based sampling of women at risk for BRCA1/2 mutations to compare telephone and in-person counseling for: 1) equivalency of testing uptake and 2) noninferiority of changes in psychosocial measures. Women 25 to 74 years of age with personal or family histories of breast or ovarian cancer and who were able to travel to one of 14 outreach clinics were invited to participate. Randomization was by family. Assessments were conducted at baseline one week after pretest and post-test counseling and at six months. Of the 988 women randomly assigned, 901 completed a follow-up assessment. Cluster bootstrap methods were used to estimate the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference between test uptake proportions, using a 10% equivalency margin. Differences in psychosocial outcomes for determining noninferiority were estimated using linear models together with one-sided 97.5% bootstrap CIs., Results: Uptake of BRCA1/2 testing was lower following telephone (21.8%) than in-person counseling (31.8%, difference = 10.2%, 95% CI = 3.9% to 16.3%; after imputation of missing data: difference = 9.2%, 95% CI = -0.1% to 24.6%). Telephone counseling fulfilled the criteria for noninferiority to in-person counseling for all measures., Conclusions: BRCA1/2 telephone counseling, although leading to lower testing uptake, appears to be safe and as effective as in-person counseling with regard to minimizing adverse psychological reactions, promoting informed decision making, and delivering patient-centered communication for both rural and urban women., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Little is known about psychological distress among women of African descent who are at high risk for a BRCA mutation. This is a group for whom breast cancer risk reduction is critical due to the group's high rates of breast cancer mortality. Distress is important to consider as it may reduce the potential benefit of genetic counseling and negatively affect decision making related to risk reduction. The goals of the current study were to examine breast cancer-specific distress and depressive symptoms in women of African descent at who are at high risk for a BRCA mutation and to identify background factors associated with these outcomes. Participants were 148 high-risk African American and Caribbean women who were part of a larger study that offered participants BRCA counseling at no cost. Participants completed the Impact of Events Scale, which assessed breast cancer-specific distress, and the Center of Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale, which assessed depressive symptoms. Results of analyses revealed that almost half of the sample achieved scores indicating high and clinically significant breast cancer-specific distress, while almost one-third had clinically significant depression scores. Results further showed that low income was significantly associated with cancer-specific distress, while having a cancer diagnosis was significantly associated with depressive symptoms. These results underscore the need for targeted psychological support throughout the genetic risk assessment process for this particular high-risk group.

Low use of BRCA counseling and testing services among black women has been reported in several studies, even though such services may play an important role in reducing racial disparities in breast cancer. Surprisingly, little is known about the extent to which black women at high risk for BRCA mutations actually receive recommendations for BRCA counseling. Thus, a primary goal of the current study was to identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with the receipt of physician recommendation for genetic counseling based on the self-report of black women at high risk for BRCA mutations. In this cross-sectional study, participants were 125 black women with a family history suggestive of a hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome. Participants were asked about their receipt of genetic counseling recommendation or referral. Physician recommendation was reported by over two-thirds of the sample. Multivariate analyses revealed that older age and study recruitment source, specifically community-based recruitment, were significantly and independently associated with lower likelihood of physician recommendation. Findings highlight the need for additional research to identify subgroups of high-risk black women among whom physician recommendation of genetic counseling is low but would benefit from such counseling.

Background: For BRCA1/BRCA2 gene testing to benefit public health, mutation carriers must initiate appropriate risk management strategies. There has been little research examining the long-term use and prospective predictors of the full range of risk management behaviors among women who have undergone BRCA1/2 testing. We evaluated long-term uptake and predictors of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM), risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO), chemoprevention, and cancer screening among women at a mean of 5.3 years after testing., Methods: The study participants comprised 465 women who underwent BRCA1/2 testing. Prior to genetic counseling, we measured family/personal cancer history, sociodemographics, perceived risk, cancer-specific distress, and general distress. We contacted patients at a mean of 5.3 years after testing to measure use of RRM, RRBSO, chemoprevention, and breast and ovarian cancer screening., Results: Among participants with intact breasts and/or ovaries at the time of testing, BRCA1/2 carriers were significantly more likely to obtain RRM (37%) and RRBSO (65%) compared with women who received uninformative (RRM, 6.8%; RRBSO, 13.3%) or negative (RRM, 0%; RRBSO, 1.9%) results. Among carriers, precounseling anxiety was associated with subsequent uptake of RRM. RRO was predicted by age. Carriers were also more likely have used breast cancer chemoprevention and have undergone magnetic resonance imaging screening., Conclusion: This prospective evaluation of the uptake and predictors of long-term management outcomes provides a clearer picture of decision making in this population. At a mean of 5.3 years after testing, more than 80% of carriers had obtained RRM, RRBSO, or both, suggesting that BRCA1/2 testing is likely to have a favorable effect on breast and ovarian cancer outcomes., (Copyright © 2011 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Inter-individual variation in DNA repair capacity is thought to modulate breast cancer risk. The phenotypic mutagen sensitivity assay (MSA) measures DNA strand breaks in lymphocytes; women with familial and sporadic breast cancers have a higher mean number of breaks per cell (MBPC) than women without breast cancer. Here, we explore the relationships between the MSA and the Rad51 gene, which encodes a DNA repair enzyme that interacts with BRCA1 and BRCA2, in BRCA1 mutation carriers and women with sporadic breast cancer., Methods: Peripheral blood lymphoblasts from women with known BRCA1 mutations underwent the MSA (n = 138 among 20 families). BRCA1 and Rad51 genotyping and sequencing were performed to identify SNPs and haplotypes associated with the MSA. Positive associations from the study in high-risk families were subsequently examined in a population-based case-control study of breast cancer (n = 1170 cases and 2115 controls)., Results: Breast cancer diagnosis was significantly associated with the MSA among women from BRCA1 families (OR = 3.2 95%CI: 1.5-6.7; p = 0.004). The Rad51 5'UTR 135 C>G genotype (OR = 3.64; 95% CI: 1.38, 9.54; p = 0.02), one BRCA1 haplotype (p = 0.03) and in a polygenic model, the E1038G and Q356R BRCA1 SNPs were significantly associated with MBPC (p = 0.009 and 0.002, respectively). The Rad51 5'UTR 135C genotype was not associated with breast cancer risk in the population-based study., Conclusions: Mutagen sensitivity might be a useful biomarker of penetrance among women with BRCA1 mutations because the MSA phenotype is partially explained by genetic variants in BRCA1 and Rad51.

Few studies have quantitatively evaluated the uptake and outcomes of BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing in men. We conducted a prospective longitudinal study to describe and compare uptake of and psychosocial outcomes following BRCA1/2 testing in a sample of men and women at high-risk for carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. Men (n = 98) and women (n = 243) unaffected with cancer completed baseline assessments prior to genetic counseling and testing and then 6- and 12-months post-testing. Most men (n = 94; 95.9%) opted to have genetic testing, of whom 44 received positive BRCA1/2 genetic test results and 50 received true negative results. Among women, 93.4% had genetic testing, of whom 79 received positive results and 148 received negative results. In multivariate models, male BRCA1/2 carriers reported significantly higher genetic testing distress (6-months: Z = 4.48, P < 0.0001; 12-months: Z = 2.78, P < 0.01) than male non-carriers. After controlling for baseline levels of distress, no statistically significant differences emerged between male and female BRCA1/2 carriers in psychological distress at 12-months post-testing, although absolute differences were evident over time. Predictors of distress related to genetic testing among male carriers at 12-months included higher baseline cancer-specific distress (Z = 4.73, P < 0.0001) and being unmarried (Z = 2.18, P < 0.05). Similarly, baseline cancer-specific distress was independently associated with cancer-specific distress at 6- (Z = 3.66, P < 0.001) and 12-months (Z = 4.44, P < 0.0001) post-testing among male carriers. Clinically, our results suggest that pre-test assessment of distress and creation of educational materials specifically tailored to the needs and concerns of male carriers may be appropriate in this important but understudied high-risk group.

Background: Responses following BRCA1/2 genetic testing are relevant for the comprehension of risk status and may play a role in risk management decision making. The objective of this study was to evaluate a psychosocial telephone counseling (PTC) intervention delivered to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers following standard genetic counseling (SGC). We examined the effect of the intervention on distress and the concerns related to genetic testing., Methods: This prospective randomized clinical trial included 90 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We measured anxiety, depression, and genetic testing distress outcomes at intervention baseline and 6 and 12 months following disclosure. We evaluated the effects of SGC versus SGC plus PTC on psychological outcomes using intention-to-treat analyses through generalized estimating equations., Results: At 6 months, PTC reduced depressive symptoms (Z = -2.25, P = 0.02) and genetic testing distress (Z = 2.18, P = 0.02) compared with SGC. Furthermore, women in the intervention condition reported less clinically significant anxiety at 6 months (chi(2)(1) = 4.11, P = 0.04) than women who received SGC. We found no differences in outcomes between the intervention groups at the 12-month follow-up., Conclusions: As an adjunct to SGC, PTC delivered following disclosure of positive BRCA1/2 test results seems to offer modest short-term benefits for distress and anxiety. These results build upon a growing literature of psychosocial interventions for BRCA1/2 carriers and, given the potential impact of affect on risk management decision making, suggest that some carriers may derive benefits from adjuncts to traditional genetic counseling.

Objective: Few data are available regarding the long-term psychological impact of uninformative BRCA1/2 test results. This study examines change in distress from pretesting to 12-months post-disclosure, with medical, family history, and psychological variables, such as pretesting perceived risk of carrying a deleterious mutation prior to testing and primary and secondary appraisals, as predictors., Methods: Two hundred and nine women with uninformative BRCA1/2 test results completed questionnaires at pretesting and 1-, 6-, and 12-month post-disclosure, including measures of anxiety and depression, cancer-specific and genetic testing distress. We used a mixed models approach to predict change in post-disclosure distress., Results: Distress declined from pretesting to 1-month post-disclosure, but remained stable thereafter. Primary appraisals predicted all types of distress at 1-month post-disclosure. Primary and secondary appraisals predicted genetic testing distress at 1-month as well as change over time. Receiving a variant of uncertain clinical significance and entering testing with a high expectation for carrying a deleterious mutation predicted genetic testing distress that persisted through the year after testing., Conclusions: As a whole, women receiving uninformative BRCA1/2 test results are a resilient group. For some women, distress experienced in the month after testing does not dissipate. Variables, such as heightened pretesting perceived risk and cognitive appraisals, predict greater likelihood for sustained distress in this group and could be amenable to intervention.

Objective: Genetic testing is increasingly part of routine clinical care for women with a family history of breast cancer. Given their substantially elevated risk for breast cancer, BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers must make the difficult decision whether or not to opt for risk reducing mastectomy. To help BRCA1/2 carriers make this decision, the authors developed a computer-based interactive decision aid that was tested against usual care in a randomized controlled trial., Design: After the completion of genetic counseling, 214 female (aged 21-75) BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers were randomized to Usual Care (UC; N = 114) or Usual Care plus Decision Aid (DA; N = 100) arms. UC participants received no additional intervention. DA participants were sent the CD-ROM DA to view at home., Main Outcome Measures: The authors measured final management decision, decisional conflict, decisional satisfaction, and receipt of risk reducing mastectomy at 1-, 6-, and 12-months postrandomization., Results: Longitudinal analyses revealed that the DA was effective among carriers who were initially undecided about how to manage their breast cancer risk. Within this group, the DA led to an increased likelihood of reaching a management decision (OR = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.62, 5.90; p < .001), decreased decisional conflict (B = -.46, z = -3.1, p <002), and increased satisfaction (B = .27, z = 3.1, p = .002) compared to UC. Among carriers who had already made a management decision by the time of randomization, the DA had no benefit relative to UC., Conclusion: These results demonstrate that BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers who are having difficulty making a breast cancer risk management decision can benefit from adjunct decision support., ((c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved.)

Genetic counseling and testing, particularly for adult onset conditions, has become increasingly available over the last decade, and it is expected that this trend will continue as additional genes are identified and as such testing diffuses into mainstream clinical care. To meet the increased demand for services, it will become necessary to explore alternative avenues to traditional face-to-face genetic counseling. One such modality is the use of telephone genetic counseling (TGC), which is easy to implement and still allows for comprehensive service delivery. Although TGC has been used with increased frequency, there is a paucity of data about its effectiveness and impact on important patient outcomes. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of telephone counseling in nongenetics and genetics settings. The rationale and aims of the largest randomized clinical trial to be performed with this mode of counseling in the context of cancer susceptibility testing for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are also explained. In addition, procedural aspects of the genetic counseling intervention and the novel tools developed to facilitate this process and to ensure adequate counselor training and quality assurance are described.

The present study prospectively examined change in diet and physical activity behaviors in 115 women undergoing BRCA1/2 gene testing (46 mutation positive, 46 uninformative and 23 definitive negative). Participants completed measures of diet and physical activity at three time points: prior to genetic testing and 1-and 6-months after receipt of genetic test results. Repeated measures analyses examined between-and within-group differences among participants who received BRCA1/2 positive, uninformative, or definitive negative results. There were no within-group differences across time points or between-group differences at any time point for diet or physical activity. Most participants, overall and within each group, did not meet recommended guidelines for fruit and vegetable and dietary fat consumption. These findings suggest that women do not make spontaneous changes in diet and physical activity following the genetic testing and counseling process. A brief intervention may be necessary for patients who are interested in making changes in modifiable risk factors to complement more definitive risk-reduction strategies.

Background: Registries of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes are an invaluable resource for cancer research, yet little is known about the predictors of enrollment in hereditary cancer registries. We sought to identify the factors that characterize individuals who enroll versus those who decline participation in a Familial Cancer Registry (FCR). We also sought to identify the factors associated with provision of a blood sample to the FCR., Methods: Participants (n = 549) had a 10% or greater prior probability of having a BRCA1/2 mutation or were members of a family with a known BRCA1/2 mutation., Results: Of 549 participants, 81.1% (n = 445) enrolled in the FCR and 18.9% (n = 104) declined. Independent significant predictors of FCR participation included: lower anxiety (odds ratio(0.5 SD), 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.95) and being unaffected with breast or ovarian cancer (odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.67). Of the 445 FCR participants, 80.4% provided a blood sample whereas 19.6% declined, with blood sample provision predicted by being employed full time (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-2.16)., Conclusion: These findings have implications for the generalizability of results from research using hereditary cancer registry samples. Individuals who are affected with breast/ovarian cancer and have more anxiety are less likely to enroll in a hereditary cancer registry. Clinically, these results indicate that cancer registry enrollment strategies could benefit from the use of tailored approaches to increase the enrollment of individuals that are less likely to participate.

Mothers who participate in genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk must decide if, when, and how to ultimately share their BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) test results with their minor-age children. One of the primary aides for mothers in making this decision is cancer genetic counseling. However, counseling is limited in how well it can educate mothers about such decisions without the availability of resources that are specific to family communication and genetic testing per se. In an effort to fill this gap and identify mothers most likely to benefit from such resources, surveys were conducted with 187 mothers undergoing BRCA1/2 testing who had children 8-21 years old. Data were collected weeks after genetic testing but prior to mothers' learning of their test results; quantitative assessments of informational resource needs (i.e., speaking with previous BRCA1/2 testing participants who are parents regarding their experiences, reading educational literature about options and what to expect, speaking with a family counselor, attending a family support group, and self-nominated other resources), testing motivations, decision making vigilance, and decisional conflict regarding communicating test results to children were included. Mothers' most-to-least frequently cited information resource needs were: literature (93.4%), family counseling (85.8%), prior participants (79.0%), support groups (53.9%), and other (28.9%; e.g., pediatricians and psychologists). Seventy-eight percent of mothers were interested in accessing three or more resources. In multivariate regression analyses, testing motivations (beta = 0.35, p = 0.03), decision-making vigilance (beta = 0.16, p = 0.00), and decisional conflict (beta = 0.10, p = 0.00) were associated with mothers' need level; mothers with a greater interest in testing to learn about their children's risks, those with more vigilant decision-making styles, and those with higher decisional conflict had the greatest need. In conjunction with enhanced genetic counseling focusing on family disclosure, educational literature, and psychosocial support may promote improved outcomes.

Purpose: Recent studies indicate that high-risk breast cancer patients (ie, women who carry mutations in BRCA1/2 genes) who opt for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) have a substantially reduced risk of developing contralateral breast cancer. However, the immediate and long-term impact of this decision on women's quality of life and psychosocial functioning is largely unknown. In this study, we compared the impact of BRCA1/2 genetic test result and CPM on these outcomes among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who opted for CPM at the time of their definitive surgical treatment versus patients who did not., Patients and Methods: Participants were 149 high-risk women who underwent genetic counseling and testing for alterations in the BRCA1/2 genes. We measured self-reported quality of life, cancer-specific distress, and genetic testing-specific distress using standardized instruments before receipt of genetic test results and again 1 and 12 months later., Results: Compared with patients who chose breast conservation or unilateral mastectomy, those who chose mastectomy of the affected breast and CPM of the unaffected breast did not report diminished quality of life or elevated distress., Conclusion: With respect to quality of life and distress, patients who choose CPM fare as well as those who do not in the first year after surgery.

Background: Among newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who are at risk for carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, knowledge of mutation status can influence local breast cancer treatment decisions. Thus, genetic testing at the time of diagnosis is increasingly considered an option for such patients. In this study, we evaluated factors associated with the decision to undergo BRCA1/BRCA2 gene testing at the time of initial breast cancer diagnosis., Methods: Participants were newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who had not yet received definitive local breast cancer treatment and who had a family history consistent with hereditary breast cancer. Participants were offered genetic counseling and BRCA1/BRCA2 testing with results in 2 to 3 weeks., Results: Of 231 patients who referred to the study, 20 (9%) declined the baseline interview, 34 (15%) completed a baseline interview but declined genetic testing, and 177 (76%) underwent BRCA1/BRCA2 testing. Physician recommendation for BRCA1/BRCA2 testing and indecision about definitive local treatment were both associated with undergoing testing. Among patients who were tested, 38 (21%) proceeded with definitive local treatment before receiving test results. Delay in the availability of test results and low levels of anxiety were associated with the decision to proceed with definitive local treatment before receiving test results., Conclusions: These results suggest that if rapid testing is available and genetic referrals are made for appropriate patients, a high proportion are likely to opt for such testing. In particular, patients who have not yet reached a decision about definitive local treatment may benefit from a genetic referral.

Background: Despite the potential importance of communication about genetic testing between test participants and their significant others, little is known about social support and communication between women undergoing BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing and their partners., Purpose: The aims of this longitudinal study were to examine communication about genetic testing during and following testing and to evaluate whether communication is associated with psychological distress reported by test participants and their partners., Methods: Participants were 153 women who were undergoing genetic testing and 118 partners of women undergoing testing. Relationship communication and distress were evaluated at the time of pretest education and 6 months postdisclosure., Results: Overall, the decision to undergo testing was discussed by the majority of test participants and partners, and most couples felt their partners were supportive. Most women disclosed their results to their partners. Longitudinal analyses suggested that less support and protective buffering were associated with greater distress 6 months postdisclosure among test participants, whereas lower comfort in sharing concerns and partner support were associated with lower distress 6 months postdisclosure among partners., Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the majority of couples respond supportively during the test experience, but for a small subset of couples the process can strain the relationship. Partner support during this process is important, particularly for test participants dealing with an uninformative test result.

The objectives of this study were (1) to describe perceptions of stress and confidence following genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutations and (2) to identify predictors of these processes. Participants were 130 high-risk women affected with cancer who received BRCA1/2 test results. Individual difference characteristics and interpersonal factors were measured by self-report before genetic counseling and perceptions of stress and confidence were evaluated by self-report 1 month following disclosure of test results. BRCA1/2 test results had a significant effect only on perceptions of stress (beta = 0.38, p = 0.0001), while trait anxiety had a significant effect on both perceptions of stress (beta = 0.44, p = 0.0001) and confidence (beta = -0.41, p = 0.001). These results suggest that interventions designed to address perceptions of stress related to medical decision-making and familial concerns may need to be targeted to BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and individuals who are highly anxious.

Purpose: To assess physician recommendations about the use of tamoxifen in premenopausal BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers., Methods: We mailed surveys to a stratified random sample of 1,286 physicians selected from the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium mailing list. Eligible participants were physicians whose practice consisted of >/= 10% breast cancer patients. Participants were asked to complete a three-part, 10-minute questionnaire. Demographics and responses to hypothetical patient vignettes were analyzed., Results: Of potentially eligible participants, 27% responded to the survey, and 260 participants were included in the final analysis. Physicians did not distinguish between BRCA1 and BRCA2 status in making recommendations about tamoxifen to breast cancer patients; however, in an unaffected woman, they were more likely to recommend tamoxifen to a BRCA2 mutation carrier than to a BRCA1 mutation carrier (73% v 57%; P <.0001). In newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, physicians were much more likely to recommend tamoxifen to an estrogen receptor (ER)-positive mutation carrier versus an ER-negative carrier (94% v 27%; P <.0001). When the mutation carrier was diagnosed 10 years ago, physicians were still much more likely to recommend tamoxifen if the tumor was ER-positive versus ER-negative (79% v 35%; P <.0001)., Conclusion: Physicians' recommendations about tamoxifen use in mutation carriers with a history of breast cancer seem to be heavily dependent on ER status. This finding suggests that among mutation carriers, physicians are influenced by adjuvant treatment guidelines more so than the potential role that tamoxifen might play in the reduction of risk for contralateral breast cancer.

We conducted a prospective, observational study to determine breast cancer screening practices among self-referred high-risk women who pursued genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Of the 107 unaffected women included in this study, 41 were BRCA1/2 carriers and 66 women tested negative for a mutation previously identified in their family. All of the women underwent comprehensive pre- and posttest genetic counseling, and completed baseline and 12-month follow-up telephone interviews. The baseline (pretest) interview assessed potential predictors of mammography use, including demographics and psychosocial variables. During the year after the receipt of BRCA1/2 test results, 47% of the noncarriers and 59% of the carriers reported that they had had a mammogram [chi(2) (1, n = 107) = 1.35; P = 0.24]. Only 39% of carriers ages 25-39 reported having a mammogram, versus 74% of carriers age > or =40 [chi(2) (1, n = 41) = 5.10; P = 0.02]. Among noncarriers ages 50 and older, 83% had an annual mammogram. Factors independently associated with mammography use included age (<40, > or =40; odds ratio, 7.5; confidence interval, 2.6-21.5) and test result (odds ratio, 4.6; confidence interval, 1.1-18.7). The effects of perceived likelihood of having a BRCA1/2 gene alteration and the interaction between test result and perceived likelihood were not significant. As expected, most carriers (95%) and noncarriers (77%) obtained a clinical breast exam within the year after the receipt of test results. These data suggest that in carriers, overall, the use of breast cancer screening including mammography is good, although there was a relatively low uptake rate of mammography in younger carriers. Noncarriers had very good adherence to general population screening guidelines.

Purpose: Despite the increasingly widespread availability of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing, little is known about the psychologic impact of such testing in the clinical setting. The objective of this study was to examine the long-term psychologic impact of receiving BRCA1/2 test results within a clinic-based testing program., Patients and Methods: The participants were 279 high-risk women who underwent genetic counseling and testing for alterations in the BRCA1/2 genes. At baseline (before genetic testing) and at 6 months after the disclosure of mutation status, we measured perceived risk for breast and ovarian cancer, cancer-specific distress, and general distress. We examined the impact of the test result on each of these outcomes at the 6-month follow-up. Analyses were conducted separately for probands and their relatives who were unaffected with cancer., Results: We found no effect of test result among affected probands. Among unaffected relatives, we found that participants who received definitive negative test results exhibited significant reductions in perceived risk and distress compared with participants who received positive test results. Importantly, relatives who received positive test results did not exhibit increased distress or perceived risk., Conclusion: These results suggest that clinic-based BRCA1/2 testing can lead to psychologic benefits for individuals who receive negative test results. At 6 months after disclosure, those who receive positive or uninformative test results do not exhibit increased psychologic distress or perceived risk.

Despite the potential importance of family communication, little is known about the process and content of communicating BRCA1/2 test results to relatives. The objectives of this observational study were to describe the process and content of communicating BRCA1/2 test results to sisters, and to evaluate whether the proband's carrier status influenced communication outcomes. Participants were 43 women who were the first family member to have genetic testing (probands). Probands reported on communication outcomes for 81 sisters. Process and content variables were evaluated 1-month after receipt of BRCA1/2 test results using the Family Communication Questionnaire (FCQ). Overall, BRCA1/2 test results were communicated to 85% of sisters, and carriers communicated their results to significantly more sisters compared to uninformative (96% vs. 76%, FET = 0.02). The most important reason for communicating results was to provide genetic risk information; however, compared to uninformatives, carriers communicated their results to significantly more sisters to obtain emotional support (74%) and to get advice about medical decisions (42%) (FET = 0.001). Carriers also discussed the possibility of discrimination and recommendations for cancer management with significantly more sisters. Among sisters to whom BRCA1/2 test results were not communicated, the most important reason for not sharing test results was because of emotionally distant relationships. The results of this study suggest that probands are likely to quickly communicate their BRCA1/2 test results to relatives and that although needs for social support may motivate family communication, emotionally distant relationships may be a barrier to communication with relatives., (Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)