Assessing controversial direct-to-consumer advertising for hereditary breast cancer testing: Reactions from women and their physicians in a managed care organization

American Journal of Managed Care

Volumn 11, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 601-608

  Mouchawar, Judy ^a,d   Laurion, Suzanne ^b   Ritzwoller, Debra P ^a   Ellis, Jennifer ^a   Kulchak Rahm, Alanna ^a   Hensley Alford, Sharon ^c  

^a CLINICAL RESEARCH UNIT   (United States)

^b FLAGLER COLLEGE   (United States)

^c HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^d Kaiser Permanente Colorado   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

ADVERTIZING; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FAMILIAL CANCER; FEMALE; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MANAGED CARE; ONCOGENE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADULT; ADVERTISING; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COLORADO; FEMALE; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMANS; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIANS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 27344450445     PISSN: 10880224     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science. 1994;266:120-122.
2. Wooster R, Neuhausen SL, Mangion J, et al. Localization of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA2, to chromosome 13q12-13. Science. 1994;285:2088-2090.
3. Jenks S. BRCA1 patent dispute resolved; NIEHS included. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:412-413.
4. Koenig BA, Greely HT, McConnell LM, Silverberg HL, Raffin TA, and the members of the Breast Cancer Working Group of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society. Genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2: recommendations of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 1998;7:531-545.
5. Myriad Genetics, Inc. September 12, 2002. First ever campaign for cancer predictive test to market BRACAnalysis in Denver and Atlanta [press release]. Available at: http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker= mygn&script= 413&layout=9&item_id=333030. Accessed December 27, 2004.
6. Gray S, Olopade O. Direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests for cancer: buyer beware.) Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3191-3193.
7. Gollust SE, Hull SC, Wilfond BS. Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. JAMA. 2002;288:1762-1767.
8. Graham J. Gene-test makers woo consumers; pitches exploit fear of cancer, critics complain. Chicago Tribune. September 8, 2002.
9. Austin M. Marketing of cancer test exploits fears, critics say. Denver Post. August 30, 2002.
10. Flam F. Gene tests' accuracy reassessed; disease-risk figure may be overstated. Philadelphia Inquirer. September 17, 2002.
11. Pinsky LE, Culver JB, Hull J, et al. Why should primary care physicians know about breast cancer genetics? West J Med. 2001;175:168-173.
12. Mouchawar J, Klein C, Mullineaux L. Colorado physicians' hereditary breast cancer knowledge and practice behavior. J Cancer Educ. Spring 2001;160):33-37.
13. Wideroff L, Freedman AN, Olson L, et al. Physician use of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: results of a national survey. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003;12:295-303.
14. Escher M, Sappino AP. Primary care physicians' knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer predisposition. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:1131-1135.
15. Lerman C, Croyle R. Psychological issues in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:609-616.
16. Lodder L, Frets PG, Trijsburg RW, et al. Psychological impact of receiving a BRCA1/BRCA2 test result. Am J Med Genet. 2001;98:15-24.
17. Meiser B, Butow PN, Barratt AL, et al, and the Psychological Impact Collaborative Group. Long-term outcomes of genetic counseling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2001;44:215-225.
18. Schrag D, Kuntz KM, Garber JE, Weeks JC. Life expectancy gains from cancer prevention strategies for women with breast cancer and BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. JAMA. 2000;283:617-624.
19. Schrag D, Kuntz KM, Garber JE, Weeks JC. Decision analysis-effects of prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy on life expectancy among women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1465-1471.
20. Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Schaid DJ, et al. Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:1633-1637.
21. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al, and the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Study Group. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:427-437.
22. Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc. 2004. Mutation prevalence tables. Available at: http://www.myriadtests.com/provider/mutprevo.htm. Accessed December 27, 2004.
23. Domchek SM, Eisen A, Calzone K, et al. Application of breast cancer risk prediction models in clinical practice. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:593-601.
24. The BayesMendel lab. BRCAPRO. Available at: http://astor.som.jhmi.edu/ brcapro/. Accessed December 27, 2004.
25. Thewes B, Meiser B, Hickie IB. Psychometric properties of the Impact of Event Scale amongst women at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2001;10:459-468.
26. Direct to Consumer (DTC) Advertising of Genetic Tests. Workshop summary. The National Human Genome Research Institute. March 23, 2004. Available at http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/12010660. Accessed August 24, 2004.
27. Direct to Consumer Marketing of Genetic Tests. The National Human Genome Research Institute. March 23, 2004. Available at: http://www.nhgri. nih.gov/12010659. Accessed August 24, 2004.
28. Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc. Integrated Consumer Awareness Campaign: Post-Pilot Evaluation Report. Denver, Colo: July 2004.
29. Absetz P, Aro AR, Sutton SR. Experience with breast cancer, pre-screening perceived susceptibility and the psychological impact of screening. Psychooncology. 2003;12:305-318.
30. Perez-Stable EJ, Sabogal F, Otero-Sabogal R, Hiatt RA, McPhee SJ. Misconceptions about cancer among Latinos and Anglos JAMA. 1992;268:3219-3223.
31. Laws MB, Mayo SJ. The Latina Breast Cancer Control study, year one; factors predicting screening mammography utilization by urban Latina women in Massachusetts. J Community Health. 1998;23:251-267.
32. Chavez LR, Hubbell FA, Mishra SI, Valdez RB. The influence of fatalism on self-reported use of Papanicolaou smears. Am J Prev Med. 1997;13:418-424.
33. Thompson HS, Valdimarsodottir HB, Jandorf L, Redd W. Perceived disadvantages and concerns about abuses of genetic testing for cancer risk: differences across African American, Latina and Caucasian women. Patient Educ Couns. 2003;51:217-227.
34. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: evaluating direct-to-consumer marketing-Atlanta, Denver, Raleigh-Durham; and Seattle, 2003. MMWR. 2004;53:603-606.
35. Lewis C. The impact of direct-to-consumer advertising. FDA Consumer magazine. March-April 2003. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2003/ 203_dtc.html. Accessed August 24, 2004.
36. Weissman JS, Blumenthal D, Silk AJ, et al. Physicians report on patient encounters involving direct-to-consumer advertising. Health Aff (Millwood). January-June 2004; Suppl Web Exclusives: W4-219-233.
37. Mouchawar J, Alford SH, Laurion S, et al. Impact of direct-to-consumer advertising for hereditary breast cancer testing on genetic services at a managed care organization: a naturally-occurring experiment. Genet Med. 2005;7:191-197.
38. Rados C. Truth in advertising: Rx drug ads come of age. FDA Consumer magazine. July-August 2004. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2004/ 404_ads.html. Accessed August 24, 2004.