Genetic counselling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: the gent(le) approach

The counselling experience with 50 Flemish families in whom mutation analysis of the total coding region of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene has been initiated, is presented. Genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility is offered by a multidisciplinary team. During the counselling sessions, special attention is given to comprehensible and emotionally acceptable communication of genetic information and to the psychosocial evaluation of the counselee. The limitations of molecular testing and the controversy surrounding cancer prevention strategies are also discussed. The overall acceptance of mutation testing is high. Some of the problems encountered are inaccuracy of the reported family history, poor retrieval of the medical records of affected family members and the reluctance of many patients to inform their relatives about the possibility of being tested.     

Predictive testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivation, illness representations and short-term psychological impact

This paper describes the motivation, recall of cancer risks, and illness representations of 40 individuals who had a predictive test for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) as well as the short-term impact of predictive testing by means of a semi-structured interview and self-report questionnaires. The main motives for predictive testing were early detection of cancer, knowledge of the children's risk and reduction of uncertainty. Overall, recall of cancer risks was good. Measurements of illness representations revealed low perceptions of "threat" of cancer and high confidence in the controllability of the disease. Distress was within normal ranges. Distress decreased significantly from pre- to post-test in non-carriers and did not in carriers. It also decreased in individuals for whom "reducing uncertainty" was a very important motive for the test, not in the others. Although part of the carriers did not have colonoscopies, all carriers intended to have regular colonoscopies in the future.     

Surveillance behavior and prophylactic surgery after predictive testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer

This article describes breast or ovarian cancer surveillance practices and prophylactic surgery involving 34 carriers and 34 noncarriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation within the year after predictive testing. It also evaluates the effect of the predictive test result on cancer screening practices and provides insight into factors important in the decision-making process about health-related behavior. Within the year following predictive testing, 9% (3 of 34) of the carriers decided to have a prophylactic mastectomy. The majority of the carriers was adherent to recommendations regarding regular cancer surveillance following predictive testing. Furthermore, carriers' adherence to clinical breast examination and mammography recommendations significantly increased from pre- to posttest and was significantly higher than noncarriers' utilization after testing. Of the carriers eligible for prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy, 75% had this operation. All carriers who were advised to have regular surveillance of the ovaries had ovarian ultrasounds. The authors gave major attention to factors playing a part in the decision-making process about health-related behavior.     

Comparing family members' motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative analysis

Genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer reveals significant risk information regarding one''s chances of developing cancer that has potential implications for patients and their families. This study reports on the motivations and attitudes of index patients and their relatives towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. In total, 10 female index patients and 20 of their relatives were interviewed regarding their experiences of communicating genetic information within their families, and their motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing. The analysis found two types of ‘family groups'': groups strongly committed to genetic testing and groups uncertain about testing. Within committed family groups, index patients and their relatives felt obliged to be tested for others, leading some relatives to be tested without having fully thought through their decision or the implications of knowing their mutation status. These family groups also described considerations in relation to the value of testing for themselves. In family groups uncertain about testing, relatives had not attended for predictive testing, had postponed decision making until some point in the future or had expressed ambivalence about the value of testing for themselves. Results suggest the value of explicitly acknowledging motivations for genetic testing within the context of family obligations, relationships and communication, and the possible value of involving family members in genetic counselling and decision making from a family''s first contact with genetic services.     

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

OBJECTIVES—To evaluate the feasibility of a reduced counselling programme for predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) in terms of counsellees' opinions on the extent and significance of genetic counselling and need for psychological support at different phases of the testing procedure.
DESIGN—Prospective follow up study with pre-test questionnaire assessment of background sociodemographic variables. The protocol comprised a pre-test counselling session, a period for reflection, and a test disclosure session. The outcome variables were studied by post-test questionnaires at one month and one year follow up.
SUBJECTS—Two hundred and seventy one high risk members of 36 families with HNPCC who attended both counselling sessions and completed the questionnaires.
RESULTS—The pre-test counselling was considered fairly or very useful by 89% of respondents and one post-test session was considered sufficient by over 80% of respondents at follow up. Fifty three percent would have used extra psychological support had it been offered with the counselling. On enquiry one year after receiving the test result, only 2% stated that the need for support was at its greatest at that time, while the majority (46%) reported that the need for support had been greatest at the moment of test disclosure.
CONCLUSIONS—A protocol that includes one comprehensive pre-test counselling session and a test disclosure session, supplemented with the option of professional psychological support, seems to be sufficient for both the educational and supportive needs of counsellees. Only a minority expressed a need for post-test follow up sessions, which suggests that, in this disorder, resources can be directed to the beneficial surveillance programmes rather than to extensive psychological support.


Keywords: predictive genetic testing; genetic counselling; HNPCC; hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer     

Genetic susceptibility testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer--approach from a commercial clinical laboratory

Genetic testing for hereditary cancers and other common diseases are still considered as the research testing, not for the clinical testing in Japan. One of the major reason of this situation is related to the guidelines regarding the human genetic testing issued successively in the spring of 2001, one by joint work of the eight learned societies and the other by the Japan clinical laboratories association. Both of these guidelines warn the condition of the clinical application of genetic testing after research stage must have the evidence data for clinical utility. We describe the situation of the genetic testing in the U.S. focusing the social background of increasing breast cancer cases and the contribution of Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc. for the genetic testing industry. We also describe the Japanese situation of the genetic testing and problems to be solved before spreading widely.     

Genetic testing for hereditary colorectal cancer in children: long-term psychological effects

Children who carry a gene mutation for familial adenomatous polyposis are virtually certain to develop colorectal cancer without annual endoscopic screening and a colectomy when polyps appear. Predictive genetic testing can identify children who need regular surveillance. While the medical benefits of genetic testing are clear, the psychological effects have not been well studied. We evaluated the long-term psychological effects of genetic testing in 48 children and their parents. In each family, one parent was a known APC gene mutation carrier. Before genetic testing, and three times afterward, participants completed measures of psychological functioning, which, for children, included depression and anxiety symptoms, and behavior problems and competencies. Parents completed a measure of depression symptoms. Data were collected at 3-, 12-, and 23-55 months after disclosure. Twenty-two children tested positive; 26 children tested negative. Mean length of follow-up was 38 months. There were no clinically significant changes in mean psychological test scores in children or parents, regardless of the children's test results or the sex of the affected parent. However, the group of children who tested positive and had a mutation-positive sibling showed significant, but subclinical, increases in depression symptoms. Furthermore, several individual mutation-negative children with a positive sibling had clinical elevations in anxiety symptoms at one or more follow-up. Behavior problems declined for all groups, and behavior competence scores remained unchanged. We conclude that most children do not suffer clinically significant psychological distress after testing. However, because some children showed clinically significant anxiety symptoms, long-term psychological support should be available to those families with both mutation-positive and mutation-negative children, and with multiple mutation-positive children. Our findings should call for a multidisciplinary approach to genetic testing for children.     

Ethics of predictive DNA-testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

The recent identification of gene mutations involved in hereditary cancers increasingly allows for predictive DNA-testing. There is an urgent need to analyse the ethical issues involved. This article concentrates on the ethics of predictive testing for mutations in the breast (and ovarian) cancer genes BRCA1 and -2. Using international guidelines for presymptomatic DNA-testing for Huntington disease and the Li-Fraumeni syndrome as a model, a provisional protocol, which entails four parts is presented: (i) inclusion and exclusion criteria; (ii) preparing for the test; (iii) informing about the results of the test; (iv) post-test counselling and evaluation. The importance of an integral education of both doctors and the public is stressed.     

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: impact on relationships

Members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families often express concern during genetic counseling about the impact of BRCA1/2 testing on close relatives. Yet whether there are likely to be adverse effects of either the decision to undergo genetic testing or the results of testing on family relationships is unknown. One purpose of this study was to assess the impact on close family relationships. Within a randomized trial of breast cancer genetic counseling methods, members of 13 HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a known family mutation. The Family Relationship Index (FRI) of the Family Environment Scale (FES) was used to measure perceived family cohesion, conflict, and expressiveness at baseline and again 6-9 months following the receipt of test results, or at the equivalent time for those who declined testing. Participants (n = 212) completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Comparisons were made between testers and non-testers as well as between those who tested positive and negative for the family mutation. One hundred eighty-one participants elected to undergo genetic testing (85%) and 47 (26%) were identified to have a mutation. After adjusting for baseline family relationship scores, counseling intervention, gender and marital status, non-testers reported a greater increase in expressiveness (P = 0.006) and cohesion (P = 0.04) than testers. Individuals who tested positive reported a decrease in expressiveness (P = 0.07), although as a trend. Regardless of test decision or test result, those who were randomized to a client-centered counseling intervention reported a decrease in conflict (P = 0.006). Overall, study results suggest that undergoing genetic testing and learning ones BRCA1/2 status may affect family relationships. Those individuals who declined testing reported feeling closer to family members and more encouraged to express emotions to other family members demonstrating potential benefit from the offer of testing. Since those who tested positive reported feeling less encouraged to express their emotions within the family, we recommend helping clients to identify others with whom they feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and feelings about their positive gene status and increased cancer risk.     

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families III: risk perception and screening

This study aimed to ascertain whether cancer risk perception changed following the offer and subsequent receipt of BRCA1/2 results and to evaluate breast and ovarian screening practices in testers and non-testers. Members of thirteen HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a known family mutation. Perceived risk for developing breast cancer, ovarian cancer or for carrying the familial BRCA1/2 mutation, was assessed at baseline and again at 6-9 months following the receipt of test results. Breast and ovarian cancer screening data were obtained at both time-points. A total of 138 women participated and 120 (87%) chose to be tested for a known familial mutation. Twenty-eight women (24%) were identified as carriers and their perceived ovarian cancer risk and their perception of being a mutation carrier increased (P = 0.01 for both). Those testing negatives had a significant decrease in all dimensions of risk perception (P < 0.01). Regression analysis showed test results to be strong predictors of follow-up risk perception (P = 0.001), however, they were not predictors of screening practices at follow-up. Testers were more likely to have completed a clinical breast exam following testing than decliners. Mammography was positively associated with baseline adherence, age, and intrusive thoughts. Ovarian cancer worries only predicted pelvic ultrasound screening post-testing. Baseline practices and psychological factors appear to be stronger predictors of health behavior than test results.     

Acceptance of genetic testing for hereditary breast ovarian cancer among study enrollees from an African American kindred

Clinical availability of genetic testing for cancer predisposition genes is generating a major challenge for U.S. health care systems to provide relevant genetic services to underserved populations. Here we present rates of study enrollment and utilization of genetic testing in a research study on BRCA1 testing acceptance in one large kindred. We also present data on baseline access to genetic information as well as enabling and obstructing factors to study enrollment. The study population included female and male members of an African American kindred based in the rural southern United States with an identified BRCA1 mutation. A combination of quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed. Of the 161 living, eligible, and locatable kindred members, 105 (65%) enrolled in the study. Family, personal, and educational motivations were the most commonly endorsed reasons for study participation. The most commonly cited reasons for refusal to participate in the study were: lack of interest, time constraints, and negative experiences with prior participation in genetic research. Eighty three percent of the participants underwent BRCA1 testing. In multiple logistic regression analysis, age 40-49 (odds ratio (OR) = 6.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.2-39.5), increased perceived risk of being a BRCA1 mutation carrier (OR = 4.1; 95% CI = 1.1-14.6), and high cancer genetics knowledge levels (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1-2.3) were associated with BRCA1 testing acceptance. The results of this study indicate that cognitive and demographic factors may influence genetic research participation and genetic testing decisions among African Americans who are at increased risk of carrying a deleterious BRCA1 mutation.     

'Indirect' BRCA1/2 testing: a useful approach in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families without a living affected relative

We report an approach for BRCA1/2 testing whereby genetic testing can be offered to families at high risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer but where no DNA from affected relatives is available. By testing two or more unaffected relatives at 50% risk of being heterozygous for a potential BRCA1/2 mutation, there is a chance of up to 99% of finding a mutation that would have been detectable in an affected individual from the same family. The overall likelihood of identifying a mutation is dependent on the family history, and therefore 'indirect' testing would be most applicable for families with a very high risk of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. Using this approach also requires balancing issues of testing resource limitations, family dynamics and adequate preparation of unaffected persons for a positive test, with the advantages of targeting screening and prophylactic surgery.     

Communication with close and distant relatives in the context of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients

The psychological aspects of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in cancer patients (diagnostic genetic testing) have so far received less attention than predictive genetic testing in unaffected persons. Our study is aimed at gaining insight into the psychological aspects of diagnostic genetic testing and at formulating practical recommendations for counseling. Cancer patients often play a key role in the communication of information to relatives because they were the first individuals to be tested in the family. The present article focuses on the communication to close and distant relatives about the hereditary cancer, the genetic test and its result. Participants previously diagnosed with breast and/or ovarian cancer, with a family history of these cancers and who requested DNA-testing, were eligible for the study. Of the 83 eligible patients who could be contacted, 63 participated (response rate = 76%). Twenty-six participants were members of a family where a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation was detected. The DNA-analysis in the family of 37 participants had not revealed any mutation. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and psychological tests and questionnaires. The dissemination of information was largely focused on first-degree relatives. Communication to distant relatives about the genetic test and its result was problematic. Other than the genetic test result and age as "objective" predictors of informing distant relatives, little and/or superficial contact seemed to be the major subjective barrier to informing distant relatives. Furthermore, the knowledge about HBOC of these messengers reveals several shortcomings. Communication within the family should receive special attention during counseling.     

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: effectiveness of problem-solving training as a counseling intervention

It remains uncertain whether members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families experience psychological distress with genetic testing and whether pre-test counseling can have a moderating effect on client well-being. One purpose of this study was to assess change in psychological well-being from baseline to 6-9 months follow-up and the effect of a problem-solving training (PST) intervention on psychological well-being. Two hundred and twelve members of 13 HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a previously identified family mutation. Participants received education and were randomized to one of two counseling interventions; PST or client-centered counseling. Psychological well-being was assessed at baseline and again at 6-9 months following the receipt of test results, or at the equivalent time for those participants who chose not to undergo testing. Well-being was assessed using measures of depressive symptoms (CESD), intrusive thoughts (IES), cancer worries, and self-esteem. Comparisons were made between those who chose testing and those who did not as well as between those who received positive and negative test results. One hundred eighty one participants elected to undergo genetic testing (85%) and 47 of these (26%) were identified as BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Breast and ovarian cancer worries decreased significantly (p = 0.007 and 0.008, respectively) in those who tested negative while there was no appreciable change in psychological well-being from baseline to follow-up in either those who tested positive or in non-testers. Among all participants, particularly testers, those randomized to PST had a greater reduction in depressive symptoms than those randomized to client-centered counseling (p < 0.05 and p = 0.02, respectively). Regardless of the decision to test, individuals with a personal history of cancer (n = 22) were more likely to have an increase in breast cancer worries compared to those who had never been diagnosed with cancer (p < 0.001). Results suggest that a problem-solving counseling intervention may help to enhance psychological well-being following testing and that a personal history of cancer may increase psychological distress associated with genetic testing.     

Predictive and prognostic biomarker testing in invasive breast cancer

Surgical pathologists play an important role in ordering and interpreting biomarker testing for prognostic and predictive purposes. In invasive breast cancer, these biomarkers include hormone receptors, HER2 expression, multi-gene expression assays, checkpoint inhibitor staining, single gene mutation status, and genomic findings. Additionally, there are tests that predict response to “tumor-agnostic” drugs targeting gene-specific alterations or protein expression changes, regardless of tumor type. The assays employed to assess these biomarkers range from immunohistochemistry to RNA expression to next-generation sequencing. Each assay has specific indications and technical pitfalls. The pathologist must select the correct specimen, choose the area for microdissection, and consider cellularity and tissue adequacy. Often, the pathologist will also provide interpretation of the results. This review will provide an overview of these biomarker tests in breast cancer, describe their indications and utilization, and list some of their challenges. It will serve as a practical reference for pathologists in their integral role in patient care.