Perceiving cancer-risks and heredity-likelihood in genetic-counseling: How counselees recall and interpret BRCA 1/2-test results

Clinical Genetics

Volumn 79, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 207-218

  Vos, J ^a   Oosterwijk, J C ^b   Gomez Garcia E ^c   Menko, F H ^d   Jansen, A M ^a   Stoel, R D ^e   Van Asperen, C J ^a   Tibben, A ^a,f   Stiggelbout, A M ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e NETHERLANDS FORENSIC INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^f ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

BRCA1 2; Genetic counselling; Heuristic; Interpretation; Oncology; Perception; Psychology; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN; DNA;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RISK; FAMILIAL CANCER; FEMALE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC COUNSELING; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; PEDIGREE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC TESTING; HUMANS; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PERCEPTION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK;

EID: 79551617964     PISSN: 00099163     EISSN: 13990004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2010.01581.x     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Stratton M, Rahman N. The emerging landscape of breast cancer susceptibility. Nat Genet 2008: 40: 17-22.
2. Broadstock M, Michie S, Marteau T. Psychological consequences of predictive genetic testing: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2000: 8: 731-738.
3. Heshka JT, Palleschi C, Howley H et al. A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing. Genet Med 2008: 10: 19-32.
4. Schlich-Bakker KJ, ten Kroode HFJ, Ausems MGEM. A literature review of the psychological impact of genetic testing on breast cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns 2006: 62: 13-20.
5. Meiser B. Psychological impact of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: an update of the literature. Psychooncology 2005: 14: 1060-1074.
6. Butow PN, Lobb EA, Meiser B et al. Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: a systematic review. Med J Aust 2003: 178: 77-81.
7. 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.
8. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Ladder LN et al. Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol 2003: 21: 3867-3874.
9. Bish A, Sutton S, Jacobs C et al. Changes in psychological distress after cancer genetic counselling: a comparison of affected and unaffected women. Br J Cancer 2002: 86: 43-50.
10. Watson M, Foster C, Eeles R et al. Psychosocial impact of breast/ovarian (BRCA 1/2) cancer-predictive genetic testing in a UK multi-centre clinical cohort. Br J Cancer 2004: 91: 1787-1794.
11. Watson M, Duvivier V, Walsh MW et al. Family history of breast cancer: what do women understand and recall about their genetic risk? J Med Genet 1998: 35: 731-738.
12. Wood ME, Mullineaux L, Rahm AK et al. Impact of BRCA1 testing on women with cancer: A pilot study. Genet Test 2000: 4: 265-272.
13. Claes E, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A et al. Diagnostic genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients: Women's looking back on the pre-test period and a psychological evaluation. Genet Test 2004: 8: 13-21.
14. Lerman C, Hughes C, Lemon SJ et al. What you don't know can hurt you: Adverse psychologic effects in members of BRCA1-linked and BRCA2-linked families who decline genetic testing. J Clin Oncol 1998: 16: 1650-1654.
15. Croyle RT, Smith KR, Botkin JR et al. Psychological responses to BRCA1 mutation testing: Preliminary findings. Health Psychol 1997: 16: 63-72.
16. Arver B, Haegermark A, Platten U et al. Evaluation of psychosocial effects of pre-symptomatic testing for breast/ovarian and colon cancer pre-disposing genes: a 12-month follow-up. Fam Cancer 2004: V3: 109-116.
17. van Roosmalen MS, Stalmeier PFM, Verhoef LCG et al. Impact of BRCA1/2 testing and disclosure of a positive test result on women affected and unaffected with breast or ovarian cancer. Am J Med Genet A 2004: 124A: 346-355.
18. Lerman C, Croyle RT, Tercyak KP et al. Genetic testing: psychological aspects and implications. J Consult Clin Psychol 2002: 70: 784-797.
19. Ritvo P, Robinson G, Irvine J et al. Psychological adjustment to familial genetic risk assessment: differences in two longitudinal samples. Patient Educ Couns 2000: 40: 163-172.
20. Kent G, Howie H, Fletcher M et al. The relationship between perceived risk, thought intrusiveness and emotional well-being in women receiving counselling for breast cancer risk in a family history clinic. Br J Health Psychol 2000: 5: 15-26.
21. Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Chabal F et al. Cancer genetic consultation and anxiety in healthy consultees. Psychol Health 1999: 14: 379-390.
22. Hopwood P, Keeling F, Long A et al. Psychological support needs for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer: Some preliminary indicators. Psychooncology 1998: 7: 402-412.
23. Hopwood P, Shenton A, Lalloo F et al. Risk perception and cancer worry: an exploratory study of the impact of genetic risk counselling in women with a family history of breast cancer. J Med Genet 2001: 38: 139-142.
24. Watson M, Lloyd S, Davidson J et al. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception and mental health in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1999: 79: 868-874.
25. Etchegary H. Psychological aspects of predictive genetic-test decisions: what do we know so far? Anal Soc Issues Public Policy 2004: 4: 13-31.
26. Schwartz MD, Kaufman E, Peshkin BN et al. Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and ovarian cancer screening following BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing. J Clin Oncol 2003: 21: 4034-4041.
27. Martin W, Lobchuk M. Breast cancer risk perception and surveillance: an integrative review. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs 2003: E10: 30-55.
28. Vernon SW. Risk perception and risk communication for cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999: 25: 101-119.
29. McCaul KD, Branstetter AD, Schroeder DM et al. What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health Psychol 1996: 15: 423-429.
30. Smerecnik CMR, Mesters I, Verweij E et al. A systematic review of the impact of genetic counseling on risk perception accuracy. J Genet Counsel 2009: 18: 217-228.
31. Sivell S, Elwyn G, Gaff CL et al. How risk is perceived, constructed and interpreted by clients in clinical genetics, and the effects on decision making: systematic review. J Genet Counsel 2008: 17: 30-63.
32. Katapodi MC, Lee KA, Facione NC et al. Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: a meta-analytic review. Prev Med 2004: 38: 388-402.
33. van Dijk S, Otten W, van Asperen CJ et al. Feeling at risk: how women interpret their familial breast cancer risk. Am J Med Genet A 2004: 131A: 42-49.
34. Meiser B, Butow P, Barratt A et al. Risk perceptions and knowledge of breast cancer genetics in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Psychol Health 2001: 16: 297-311.
35. Lloyd S, Watson M, Waites B et al. Familial breast cancer: a controlled study of risk perception, psychological morbidity and health beliefs in women attending for genetic counselling. Br J Cancer 1996: 74: 482-487.
36. Sagi M, Kaduri L, Zlotogora J et al. The effect of genetic counseling on knowledge and perceptions regarding risks for breast cancer. J Genet Counsel 2008: 7: 417-418.
37. Randall J, Butow P, Kirk J et al. Psychological impact of genetic counselling and testing in women previously diagnosed with breast cancer. Intern Med J 2001: 31: 397-405.
38. Cull A, Anderson EDC, Campbell S et al. The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women's risk perceptions and levels of distress. Br J Cancer 1999: 79: 501-508.
39. Andrews L, Meiser B, Apicella C et al. Psychological impact of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in women of Ashkenazi Jewish background: A prospective study. Genet Test 2004: 8: 240-247.
40. Brain K, Gray J, Norman P et al. Randomized trial of a specialist genetic assessment service for familial breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000: 92: 1345-1351.
41. Bowen DJ, Christensen CL, Powers D et al. Effects of counseling and ethnic identity on perceived risk and cancer worry in African American women. J Clin Psychol Med Settings 1998: 5: 365-379.
42. Burke W, Culver JO, Bowen D et al. Genetic counseling for women with an intermediate family history of breast cancer. Am J Med Genet 2000: 90: 361-368.
43. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E et al. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal 2004: 24: 311-322.
44. Fischhoff B. Why (cancer) risk communication can be hard. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999: 25: 7-13 (abstr).
45. McAllister M. Personal theories of inheritance, coping strategies, risk perception and engagement in hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer families offered genetic testing. Clin Genet 2003: 64: 179-189.
46. van Dijk S, Otten W, Tollenaar RAEM et al. Putting it all behind: long-term psychological impact of an inconclusive DNA test result for breast cancer. Genet Med 2008: 10: 745-750.
47. Vos J, Otten W, van Asperen C et al. The counsellees' view of an unclassified variant in BRCA1/2: recall, interpretation, and impact on life. Psychooncology 2008: 17: 822-830.
48. Park CL, Folkman S. Meaning in the context of stress and coping. Rev Gen Psychol 1997: 1: 115-144.
49. Klitzman R. "Am I my genes?": Questions of identity among individuals confronting genetic disease. Genet Med 2009: 11: 880-889.
50. Kahneman D. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol 2003: 58: 697-720.
51. Lerman C, Schwartz MD, Miller SM et al. A randomized trial of breast cancer risk counseling: Interacting effects of counseling, educational level, and coping style. Health Psychol 1996: 15: 75-83.
52. van Dooren S, Rijnsburger AJ, Seynaeve C et al. Psychological distress in women at increased risk for breast cancer: the role of risk perception. Eur J Cancer 2004: 40: 2056-2063.
53. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Duivenvoorden H et al. The common sense model of self-regulation and psychological adjustment to genetic cancer susceptibility testing: a prospective study. Psychooncology 2007: 16: 1121-1129.
54. Hopwood P. Genetic Risk counselling for breast cancer families. Eur J Cancer 1998: 34: 1477-1479.
55. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK et al. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 2001: 127: 267-286.
56. van Asperen CJ, van Dijk S, Zoeteweij MW et al. What do women really want to know? Motives for attending familial breast cancer clinics. J Med Genet 2002: 39: 410-414.
57. Brandt R, Hartmann E, Ali Z et al. Motivations and concerns of women considering genetic testing for breast cancer: a comparison between affected and at-risk probands. Genet Test 2002: 6: 203-205.
58. Lloyd AJ. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Qual Health Care 2001: 10: 114-118.
59. Parsons E, Atkinson P. Lay constructions of genetic risk. Sociol Health Illn 1992: 14: 437-455.
60. Lippman-Hand A, Fracer FC. Genetic counseling: provision and reception of information. Am J Med Genet 2005: 3: 113-127.
61. Press NA, Yasui Y, Reynolds S et al. Women's interest in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility may be based on unrealistic expectations. Am J Med Genet 2001: 99: 99-110.
62. Frost C, Venne V, Cunningham D et al. Decision making with uncertain information: learning from women in a high risk breast cancer clinic. J Genet Counsel 2004: 13: 221-236.
63. Joreskog KG. Sorbom D. LISREL. version 8.8 (computer software) Chicago: Scientific Software International, 2008.
64. Bollen KA. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley, 1989.
65. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 2nd edn. New York: The Guilford Press, 2004.
66. McDonald RP, Ho M-HR. Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol Meth 2002: 7: 64-82.
67. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Meth Res 1992: 21: 230-258.
68. Hu LT, Bentler P. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Eqn Model 1999: 6: 1-55.
69. Coyne JC, Kruus L, Racioppo M et al. What do ratings of cancer-specific distress mean among women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer? Am J Med Genet A 2003: 116A: 222-228.
70. Schwartz MD, Peshkin BN, Hughes C et al. Impact of BRCA1/ BRCA2 mutation testing on psychologic distress in a clinic-based sample. J Clin Oncol 2002: 20: 514-520.
71. Beran T, Stanton A, Kwan L et al. The trajectory of psychological impact in BRCA1/2 genetic testing; does time heal? Ann Behav Med 2008: 36: 107-116.
72. van Oostrom I, MeijersHeijboer EJ, Duivenvoorden H et al. A prospective study of the impact of genetic susceptibility testing for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC on family relationships. Psychooncology 2006: 16: 320-328.
73. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ et al. Experience of parental cancer in childhood is a risk factor for psychological distress during genetic cancer susceptibility testing. Ann Oncol 2006: 17: 1090-1095.
74. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Duivenvoorden H et al. Family system characteristics and psychological adjustment to cancer susceptibility genetic testing: a prospective study. Clin Genet 2007: 71: 35-42.
75. Meiser B, Tucker K, Friedlander M et al. Genetic counselling and testing for inherited gene mutations in newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer: a review of the existing literature and a proposed research agenda. Breast Cancer Res 10: 2008.
76. Thewes B, Meiser B, Tucker K et al. Screening for psychological distress and vulnerability factors in women at increased risk for breast cancer: a review of the literature. Psychol Health Med 2003: 8(3): 289-305.
77. DudokdeWit AC, Tibben A, Duivenvoorden HJ et al. Predicting adaptation to presymptomatic DNA testing for late onset disorders: who will experience distress? J Med Genet 1998: 35: 745-754.
78. Vos J, Gomez-Garcia EB, Oosterwijk JC et al. Opening the psychological black box in genetic counseling. The psychological impact of DNA-testing is predicted by the counsellees' perception, the medical impact by the pathogenic or uninformative BRCA1/2-result. Psycho-Oncology: 2010 (in press).
79. Timmermans DRM, Ockhuysen-Vermey CF, Henneman L. Presenting health risk information in different formats: the effects on participants' cognitive and emotional evaluations and decisions. Patient Educ Couns 2008: 73: 443-447.
80. Henneman L, Marteau T, Timmermans DRM. Clinical geneticists' and genetic counselors' views on the communication of genetic risks: a qualitative study. Patient Educ Couns 2008: 73: 42-49.
81. Timmermans DRM. What clinicians can offer: Assessing and communicating probabilities for individual patient decision making. Horm Res 1999: 51: 58-66.
82. Ockhuysen-Vermey CF, Henneman L, van Asperen CJ et al. Design of the BRISC study: a multicentre controlled clinical trial to optimize the communication of breast cancer risks in genetic counselling. BMC Cancer 2008: 8: 283
83. Waldron CA, Van der Weijden T, Ludt S et al. What are effective strategies to communicate cardiovascular risk information to patients? a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2010 (epub ahead of print).
84. Stam P, Van der Looiu E, Voorendt M et al. Overestimated lifetime cancer risk can be reduced by feedback on preexisting estimation (EP03.03). Eur J Hum Genet 2010: 18 (abstr).
85. McCarthy Veach P, Bartels DM, LeRoy BS. Coming full circle: a reciprocal-engagement model of genetic counseling practice. J Genet Couns 2007: 16: 713-728.
86. Edwards A, Gray J, Clarke A et al. Interventions to improve risk communication in clinical genetics: systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2008: 71: 4-25.
87. Julian-Reynier C, Welkenhuysen M, Hagoel L et al. Risk communication strategies: state of the art and effectivenes in the context of cancer genetics services. Eur J Hum Genet 2003: 11: 725-736.