Communication and technology in genetic counseling for familial cancer

Clinical Genetics

Volumn 85, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 213-222

  Lynch, H T ^a   Snyder, C ^a   Stacey, M ^a   Olson, B ^a   Peterson, S K ^b   Buxbaum, S ^c   Shaw, T ^a   Lynch, P M ^b  

^a CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Colorectal cancer; Familial cancer; Genetic counseling; Genetic testing; Hereditary cancer; Hereditary non polyposis colorectal cancer; Information technology; Lynch syndrome

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

CLINICAL PRACTICE; EXTENDED FAMILY; FAMILIAL CANCER; FAMILY HISTORY; FAMILY STUDY; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC COUNSELING; HEREDITARY NONPOLYPOSIS COLORECTAL CANCER; HUMAN; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTERNET; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELATIVE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; TELEPHONE; VIDEOCONFERENCING; FAMILY; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; GERMLINE MUTATION; META ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM; RISK; TECHNOLOGY; TELECOMMUNICATION; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE;

COMMUNICATION; FAMILY; GENES, BRCA1; GENES, BRCA2; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GERM-LINE MUTATION; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; RISK; TECHNOLOGY; TELECOMMUNICATIONS;

EID: 84893020252     PISSN: 00099163     EISSN: 13990004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cge.12317     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Lynch HT, Lynch PM, Lanspa SJ, Snyder CL, Lynch JF, Boland CR. Review of the Lynch syndrome: history, molecular genetics, screening, differential diagnosis, and medicolegal ramifications. Clin Genet 2009: 76: 1-18.
2. Offit K. Clinical cancer genetics: risk counseling and management. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss, 1998.
3. Powell K. Going statewide, Frontiers. Ohio State Comprehensive Cancer Center. Summer, 2013: 19-23.
4. Hampel H, Frankel WL, Martin E et al. Feasibility of screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008: 26: 5783-5788.
5. Hampel H, Lattimer I, Frankel WL. Universal Lynch syndrome screening result notification: efficacy affected by method. 12 November 7; San Francisco: American Society of Human Genetics Annual Meeting; 2012.
6. Lynch HT. Family information service and hereditary cancer. Cancer 2001: 91: 625-628.
7. Ridge Y, Panabaker K, McCullum M, Portigal-Todd C, Scott J, McGillivray B. Evaluation of group genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns 2009: 18: 87-100.
8. Heald B, Gustafson S, Mester J et al. A time study of cancer genetic counselors using a genetic counselor-only patient care model versus a traditional combined genetic counselor plus medical geneticist care model. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2013: 11: 1076-1081.
9. Platten U, Rantala J, Lindblom A, Brandberg Y, Lindgren G, Arver B. The use of telephone in genetic counseling versus in-person counseling: a randomized study on counselees' outcome. Fam Cancer 2012: 11: 371-379.
10. Graves KD, Wenzel L, Schwartz MD et al. Randomized controlled trial of a psychosocial telephone counseling intervention in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010: 19: 648-654.
11. Sutphen R, Davila B, Shappell H et al. Real world experience with cancer genetic counseling via telephone. Fam Cancer 2010: 9: 681-689.
12. Halbert CH, Wenzel L, Lerman C et al. Predictors of participation in psychosocial telephone counseling following genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004: 13: 875-881.
13. Coelho JJ, Arnold A, Nayler J, Tischkowitz M, Mackay J. An assessment of the efficacy of cancer genetic counselling using real-time videoconferencing technology (telemedicine) compared to face-to-face consultations. Eur J Cancer 2005: 41: 2257-2261.
14. Zilliacus EM, Meiser B, Lobb EA et al. Are videoconferenced consultations as effective as face-to-face consultations for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic counseling? Genet Med 2011: 13: 933-941.
15. Meropol NJ, Daly MB, Vig HS et al. Delivery of Internet-based cancer genetic counselling services to patients' homes: a feasibility study. J Telemed Telecare 2011: 17: 36-40.
16. Green MJ, Biesecker BB, McInerney AM, Mauger D, Fost N. An interactive computer program can effectively educate patients about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Am J Med Genet 2001: 103: 16-23.
17. Green MJ, McInerney AM, Biesecker BB, Fost N. Education about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: patient preferences for a computer program or genetic counselor. Am J Med Genet 2001: 103: 24-31.
18. Green MJ, Peterson SK, Baker MW et al. Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004: 292: 442-452.
19. Green MJ, Peterson SK, Baker MW et al. Use of an educational computer program before genetic counseling for breast cancer susceptibility: effects on duration and content of counseling sessions. Genet Med 2005: 7: 221-229.
20. Krawczak M, Cooper DN, Schmidtke J. Estimating the efficacy and efficiency of cascade genetic screening. Am J Hum Genet 2001: 69: 361-370.
21. Brooks L, Lennard F, Shenton A et al. BRCA1/2 predictive testing: a study of uptake in two centres. Eur J Hum Genet 2004: 12: 654-662.
22. Peterson SK, Watts BG, Koehly LM et al. How families communicate about HNPCC genetic testing: findings from a qualitative study. Am J Med Genet (Semin Med Genet) 2003: 119C: 78-86.
23. Mesters I, Ausems M, Eichhorn S, Vasen H. Informing one's family about genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC): a retrospective exploratory study. Fam Cancer 2005: 4: 163-167.
24. Myers M, Conrad P, Blanco A et al. Kintalk.org: a novel web based communication tool for families with lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer 2013: 12 (Suppl. 2): S40(Abstract).
25. Aktan-Collan K, Haukkala A, Pylvänäinen K et al. Direct contact in inviting high-risk members of hereditary colon cancer families to genetic counselling and DNA testing. J Med Genet 2007: 44: 732-738.
26. Ramsey SD, McDermott CL, Clarke L, Blough DK. Health insurer policies toward risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening: a survey of health plan medical directors. J Insur Med 2012: 43: 92-101.
27. Burken MI, Wilson KS, Heller K, Pratt VM, Schoonmaker MM, Seifter E. The interface of Medicare coverage decision-making and emerging molecular-based laboratory testing. Genet Med 2009: 11: 225-231.
28. Watson P, Narod SA, Fodde R et al. Carrier risk status changes resulting from mutation testing in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer and hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. J Hum Genet 2003: 40: 591-596.
29. Patenaude AF, Dorval M, DiGianni LS, Schneider KA, Chittenden A, Garber JE. Sharing BRCA1/2 test results with first-degree relatives: factors predicting who women tell. J Clin Oncol 2006: 24: 700-706.
30. Costalas JW, Itzen M, Malick J et al. Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: a cancer risk assessment program's experience. Am J Med Genet 2003: 119C: 11-18.
31. Sanz J, Ramón y Cajal T, Torres A et al. Uptake of predictive testing among relatives of BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: a multicenter study in northeastern Spain. Fam Cancer 2010: 9: 297-304.
32. Cheung EL, Olson AD, Yu TM, Han PZ, Beattie MS. Communication of BRCA results and family testing in 1, 103 high-risk women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010: 19: 2211-2219.
33. Finlay E, Stopfer JE, Burlingame E et al. Factors determining dissemination of results and uptake of genetic testing in families with known BRCA1/2 mutations. Genet Test 2008: 12: 81-91.
34. Vadaparampil ST, Malo T, de la Cruz C, Christie J. Do breast cancer patients tested in the oncology care setting share BRCA mutation results with family members and health care providers? J Cancer Epidemiol 2012: 2012 Article ID 498062.
35. Senter L, O'Connor M, Oriyo F, Sweet K, Toland AE. Linking distant relatives with BRCA gene mutations: potential for cost savings. Clin Genet In press.
36. Koehly LM, Peters JA, Kenen R et al. Characteristics of health information gatherers, disseminators, and blockers within families at risk of hereditary cancer: implications for family health communication interventions. Am J Public Health 2009: 99: 2203-2209.
37. Burton-Chase AM, Hovick SR, Peterson SK et al. Changes in screening behaviors and attitudes toward screening from pre-test genetic counseling to post-disclosure in Lynch syndrome families. Clin Genet 2013: 83: 215-220.
38. Halbert CH, Lynch H, Lynch J et al. Colon cancer screening practices following genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) mutations. Arch Intern Med 2004: 164: 1881-1887.
39. Codori AM, Petersen GM, Miglioretti DL et al. Attitudes toward colon cancer gene testing: factors predicting test uptake. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999: 8: 345-351.
40. Lynch HT, Buxbaum S, Snyder, Stacey M, Shaw T, Lynch PM. The impact of family information services on genetic testing uptake among relatives in Lynch syndrome families. 3 June 2013; American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting, Chicago.
41. Aktan-Collan K, Mecklin J-K, Jarivnen HJ et al. Predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: uptake and long-term satisfaction. Int J Cancer (Pred Oncol) 2000: 89: 44-50.
42. Aktan-Collan K, Haukkala A, Mecklin J-P et al. Psychological consequences of predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC): a prospective follow-up study. Int J Cancer 2001: 93: 608-611.
43. Aktan-Collan K, Haukkala A, Mecklin JP, Uutela A, Kaariainen H. Comprehension of cancer risk one and 12months after predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. J Med Genet 2001: 38: 787-792.
44. Meiser B, Collins V, Warren R et al. Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Clin Genet 2004: 66: 502-511.
45. Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G et al. Predictive testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: subjective perception regarding colorectal and endometrial cancer, distress, and health-related behavior at one year post-test. Genet Test 2005: 9: 54-65.
46. Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Vernon SW et al. Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005: 23: 1902-1910.
47. de Wert G. Cascade screening: whose information is it anyway? Eur J Hum Genet 2005: 13: 397-398.
48. Newson AJ, Humphries SE. Cascade testing in familial hypercholesterolaemia: how should family members be contacted? Eur J Hum Genet 2005: 13: 401-408.
49. Godard B, Hurlimann T, Letendre M, Égalité N, INHERIT BRCAs. Guidelines for disclosing genetic information to family members: from development to use. Fam Cancer 2006: 5: 103-116.
50. Svendsen M. Genetics and prevention: a policy in the making. New Genet Soc 2006: 25: 51-68.
51. Tupasela A. When legal worlds collide: from research to treatment in hereditary cancer prevention. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2006: 15: 257-266.
52. Kääriäinen H, Rantanen E, Hietala M. Summary of the guidelines for genetic counselling. Eurogentest. 2006, from http://www.eurogentest.org/fileadmin/templates/eugt/pdf/summaryofguidelinesMay06.pdf. Accessed on October 28, 2013.
53. Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed individuals with colorectal cancer aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome in relatives. Genet Med 2009: 11: 35-41.
54. Healthy People 2020 Topics and Objectives: Genomics. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2013, from http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=15. Accessed on April 16, 2013.
55. Dinh TA, Rosner BI, Atwood JC et al. Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of primary genetic screening for Lynch syndrome in the general population. Cancer Prev Res 2010: 4: 9-22.
56. Ladabaum U, Wang G, Terdiman J et al. Strategies to identify the Lynch syndrome among patients with colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 2011: 155: 69-79.
57. Mvundura M, Grosse SD, Hampel H, Palomaki GE. The cost-effectiveness of genetic testing strategies for Lynch syndrome among newly diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer. Genet Med 2010: 12: 93-104.
58. Stupart DA, Goldberg PA, Algar U, Ramesar R. Surveillance colonoscopy improves survival in a cohort of subjects with a single mismatch repair gene mutation. Colorectal Dis 2009: 11: 126-130.
59. Menko FH, Aalfs CM, Henneman L et al. Informing family members of individuals with Lynch syndrome: a guideline for clinical geneticists. Fam Cancer 2013: 12: 319-324.
60. Landsbergen K, Verhaak C, Kraaimaat F, Hoogerbrugge N. Genetic uptake in BRCA-mutation families is related to emotional and behavioral communication characteristics of index patients. Fam Cancer 2005: 4: 115-119.