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.     

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.     

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.     

Psychosocial factors predicting BRCA1/BRCA2 testing decisions in members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families

Although BRCA1/2 testing has increasingly entered clinical practice, much is to be learned about the most effective ways to provide counseling to persons potentially interested in receiving test results. The purpose of this study was to identify factors affecting genetic testing decisions in a cohort of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families presented with the choice to undergo testing. Relatives in these families are known to carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Sociodemographics, personality traits, and family functioning were self-assessed using validated psychometric instruments at baseline. Among 172 individuals who participated in pretest education and counseling, 135 (78%) chose to undergo genetic testing and 37 (22%) chose not to be tested. Individuals who chose to undergo genetic testing were more likely to be older (> or =40 years), to have lower levels of optimism, and to report higher levels of cohesiveness in their families. A better understanding of factors that influence interest in predictive testing may help to inform the counseling that occurs prior to genetic testing.     

Attitudes to reproductive genetic testing in women who had a positive BRCA test before having children: a qualitative analysis

The scope of conditions for which preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is licensed has recently been expanded in the United Kingdom to include genetic predisposition to adult-onset cancer. This qualitative interview study explores reproductive decision making, knowledge of and attitudes to reproductive genetic testing (prenatal diagnosis and PGD) with 25 women aged 18-45 years who received a positive BRCA test in the United Kingdom before having children. In this cohort of younger women, BRCA testing was motivated by risk management decisions; for some, BRCA status has affected their later decisions about having children. The perceived severity of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) influences thoughts about passing on the mutation to children and willingness to consider reproductive genetic testing, but most participants do not believe HBOC is a condition for which pregnancy termination is justified. PGD is considered more acceptable and advantageous because it would prevent transmission to future generations, but women have concerns about selecting embryos and the fact that they and affected family members would not have been selected. Women would also be deterred by the need to undergo in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and ovarian stimulation for PGD. Awareness of reproductive testing options was very variable among the cohort. The findings highlight the complexities of reproductive decision making for young women who knowingly carry a BRCA mutation, and the dilemmas inherent to reproductive genetic testing when the condition being tested for also affects a prospective parent. Counselling and psychological support for BRCA-positive women and couples concerning reproductive options are strongly indicated.     

How families communicate about HNPCC genetic testing: findings from a qualitative study

Little is known about how hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) genetic counseling and testing information is communicated within at-risk families. This article describes findings from a qualitative study of 39 adult members from five families with known HNPCC-predisposing mutations. We evaluated how information from HNPCC genetic counseling and testing was disseminated in these families and how family members reacted to and acted on this information. We included family members who had been diagnosed with an HNPCC syndrome cancer, unaffected individuals who were at 50% risk of carrying a mutation, and their spouses. Participants included those who had undergone testing and those who had not. In general, all families had shared the news about an HNPCC mutation with at-risk relatives. Communication about HNPCC genetic counseling and testing followed the norms used for conveying other nonurgent family news. Mutation noncarriers, nontesters, and those who were not biological relatives were less involved in discussing genetic counseling and testing and perceived these processes as less relevant to them. Although all family members were generally willing to share information about HNPCC, probands and mutation carriers informed extended family members and actively persuaded others to seek counseling or testing. Family members who were persuaded to seek those services by the proband were more likely to have counseling and testing and were more likely to seek those services sooner. Genetic counseling should attempt to identify the existing communication norms within families and ways that family members can take an active role in encouraging others to learn about their cancer risk and options for testing. Interventions may also need to emphasize the relevance of hereditary cancer information beyond the immediate family and to unaffected family members who may be central to the communication process (e.g., spouses of mutation carriers).     

Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: a cancer risk assessment program's experience

We describe results from a survey designed to assess patterns of communication within families shortly after an individual receives results of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Shortly after disclosure of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results, the proband was contacted by phone to administer the post disclosure survey. Questions asked included whether they had shared their results with their siblings or adult children, if there were difficulties in communicating the test results, and if there was any distress associated with the sharing of results. A total of 162 women who have received results from BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing participated in the survey. The probands shared their results more often with their female than their male relatives (P < 0.001). Probands who had tested positive for a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene shared their results more often with their relatives than did probands who were not carriers (P = 0.002). Probands reported more often that their siblings rather than their adult children had difficulties understanding the results (P = 0.001). The probands who were carriers more often reported having difficulties explaining their results to their relatives (P < 0.001) and their relatives were upset on hearing the result more often than were the relatives of probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). The probands who were carriers reported more often that they were upset explaining their results to their relatives than did the probands who were not carriers (P < 0.001). Individuals are disclosing their test results to their relatives. Probands who are BRCA1- or BRCA2-positive are more likely to experience difficulty and distress with the communication of their test results to family members.     

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.     

Early use of clinical BRCA1/2 testing: associations with race and breast cancer risk

When BRCA1/2 testing became commercially available in 1996, many U.S. experts voiced concern about the potential for indiscriminate use of testing among low-risk women. Supporting this concern, several early surveys of interest in genetic testing suggested that genetic testing for cancer susceptibility might appeal most to individuals at low risk of carrying a mutation. To identify factors associated with early use of clinical BRCA1/2 testing, a case-control study was conducted at a large academic health system in the metropolitan Philadelphia region. A total of 167 women underwent genetic counseling for clinical BRCA1/2 testing between 1996 and 1997 (cases) compared with 138 women who were seen in faculty general internal medicine practices over the same period (controls). In this study we measured the risk factors for breast cancer, the risk factors for carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation, and sociodemographic characteristics. Use of BRCA1/2 counseling between 1996 and 1997 was positively associated with family but no personal history of breast cancer (odds ratio (OR), 22.4; 95% confidence interval (CI), 9.3-54.3); family and personal history of breast cancer (OR, 150.3; 95% CI, 24.1-939.6); being Caucasian and non-Jewish (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.3-13.5); being Caucasian and Jewish (OR, 8.8; 95% CI, 2.2-35.5); and being married (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.6-6.3). Use of BRCA1/2 counseling was inversely associated with increasing age (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.28 for >60 compared to <50). As suggested by the association with family history, use of counseling was associated with having a higher predicted risk of breast cancer and a higher predicted risk of carrying a BRCA1 mutation (P < 0.0001). Women who sought clinical BRCA1/2 testing in the year after it became commercially available were not the "worried well," but women at significantly increased risk of carrying a mutation. However, even after adjusting for breast cancer risk, there was a substantial racial disparity in use of BRCA1/2 testing. These findings suggest that ensuring equal access to testing for high-risk individuals irrespective of race may be as important for the future of predictive genetic testing as restricting the use of testing among low-risk individuals.     

Patient responses to the disclosure of BRCA mutation tests in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer families

Limited attention has been given to the impact of BRCA mutation disclosure on participants' psychological reaction and cancer control compliance. We asked women (290 mutation-positive, 370 mutation-negative) from 84 hereditary breast-ovarian cancer (HBOC) families with known deleterious BRCA mutations to participate in an evaluation regarding cancer prevention recommendations before and after BRCA mutation disclosure. Both men and women (n = 780) were invited to complete a questionnaire to evaluate their psychological response to BRCA mutation disclosure. Before BRCA testing, 23.0% (152 of 660) of these women underwent prophylactic bilateral mastectomy, oophorectomy, or both; of these, 53% (80 of 152) were subsequently found to be mutation negative. After mutation disclosure, 52.9% (110 of 208) of mutation carriers and 0% (0 of 203) of noncarriers underwent prophylactic surgeries. These changes were statistically significant compared with before disclosure (P < 0.0001). The rate of transvaginal ovarian ultrasound screening was significantly increased in mutation carriers (P < 0.015) and marginally decreased in noncarriers (P = 0.063) post disclosure. Psychologically, compared with noncarriers without cancer, a significantly higher percentage of carriers, regardless of their cancer status, felt guilt about passing a mutation to their children, worried about developing additional cancer or their children developing cancer, and were concerned about health insurance discrimination. Despite these psychological consequences, carriers and noncarriers reported a positive attitude toward genetic testing.     

Changes in screening behaviors and attitudes toward screening from pre‐test genetic counseling to post‐disclosure in Lynch syndrome families

The purpose of this study was to examine colonoscopy adherence and attitudes toward colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in individuals who underwent Lynch syndrome genetic counseling and testing. We evaluated changes in colonoscopy adherence and CRC screening attitudes in 78 cancer‐unaffected relatives of Lynch syndrome mutation carriers before pre‐test genetic counseling (baseline) and at 6 and 12 months post‐disclosure of test results (52 mutation negative and 26 mutation positive). While both groups were similar at baseline, at 12 months post‐disclosure, a greater number of mutation‐positive individuals had had a colonoscopy compared with mutation‐negative individuals. From baseline to 12 months post‐disclosure, the mutation‐positive group demonstrated an increase in mean scores on measures of colonoscopy commitment, self‐efficacy, and perceived benefits of CRC screening, and a decrease in mean scores for perceived barriers to CRC screening. Mean scores on colonoscopy commitment decreased from baseline to 6 months in the mutation‐negative group. To conclude, adherence to risk‐appropriate guidelines for CRC surveillance improved after genetic counseling and testing for Lynch syndrome. Mutation‐positive individuals reported increasingly positive attitudes toward CRC screening after receiving genetic test results, potentially reinforcing longer term colonoscopy adherence.     

BRCA1 in the family: A case description of the psychological implications

Our experience with the first family in the Netherlands for whom predictive DNA-testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) became an option is described. This serves to illustrate the complex emotional impact on a family as a whole, and upon the members separately, of becoming aware that breast and ovarian cancer is hereditary, and the implications of undergoing predictive testing. All family members received genetic counseling and were offered pre- and post-test psychological follow-up. We observed two important roles within the family. One member became “the messenger of the news” informing the relatives of the hereditary character of cancer in the family. Another was “the first utilizer” of the new options; namely, the predictive DNA-test and preventive surgery. This first utilizer became the example to the rest of the family. Decisions made about preventive treatment (prophylactic ovariectomy and/or mastectomy) were based on the experiences within the family, whether one identified with an affected family member with breast or with ovarian cancer. The actions and reactions perceived were illustrative of what kind of support provisions should be provided in addition to the genetic and oncological counseling for HBOC. Moreover HBOC should be considered both as an individual and a family problem and be treated as such in genetic counseling. Am. J. Med. Genet. 71:63–71, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Prevalence and correlates of mothers and fathers attending pretest cancer genetic counseling together

Objective

To determine the prevalence of fathers’ attendance at pretest cancer genetic counseling sessions with mothers undergoing BRCA1/2 genetic testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) risk, and to identify psychosocial and other correlates of fathers’ attendance.

Methods

One hundred and twenty-one fathers of minor-age children who were spouses/partners of women (mothers) undergoing such counseling and testing were recruited, completed a behavioral self-report survey, and provided data about their sociodemographic backgrounds, father–child cancer communication histories, parenting relationship quality, and information-seeking and perceived knowledge.

Results

A total of 27.3% of fathers attended pretest cancer genetic counseling with mothers. Compared to fathers who did not attend pretest cancer genetic counseling, those who did had stronger parenting alliances with mothers, were more likely to have sought out information about BRCA1/2 testing, and felt more informed about testing. In an adjusted logistic regression model of session attendance, the strength of the parenting alliance was associated with a 6% increase in the likelihood of attending genetic counseling (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01, 1.12, p < .05) and greater perceived knowledge about BRCA1/2 testing was associated with a four-fold increase in the likelihood of session attendance (OR = 4.03, CI = 1.77, 9.37, p < .001).

Conclusion

One in three fathers attend pretest cancer genetic counseling with mothers undergoing BRCA1/2 testing; those who do have closer parenting relationships and are more informed about BRCA1/2 testing.

Practice implications

When possible, providers should discuss mothers including fathers in cancer genetic counseling sessions as this may affect outcomes of HBOC genetic counseling and testing.     

Presymptomatic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2: how distressing are the pre-test weeks?

Presymptomatic DNA testing for autosomal dominant hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) became an option after the identification of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in 1994-1995. Healthy female mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk for breast cancer (56-87%) or ovarian cancer (10-60%) and may opt for intensive breast and ovary surveillance or prophylactic surgery (mastectomy/oophorectomy).We studied general and cancer related distress in 85 healthy women with a 25% or 50% risk of being carrier of a BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutation and 66 partners in the six to eight week period between genetic counselling/blood sampling and disclosure of the test result. Questionnaire and interview data are analysed. Associations are explored between levels of distress and (1) expected consequences of being identified as a mutation carrier, (2) personality traits, (3) sociodemographic variables, and (4) experiences related to HBOC.Mean pre-test anxiety and depression levels in women at risk of being a carrier and partners were similar to those of a normal Dutch population. In about 25% of those at risk of being a carrier and 10% of the partners, increased to high levels of general and cancer related distress were found. Increased levels of distress were reported by women who (1) anticipated an increase in problems after an unfavourable test outcome, (2) considered prophylactic mastectomy if found to be mutation carrier, (3) had an unoptimistic personality, (4) tended to suppress their emotions, (5) were younger than 40 years, and (6) were more familiar with the serious consequences of HBOC. Recently obtained awareness of the genetic nature of cancer in the family was not predictive of distress.The majority of the women and their partners experienced a relatively calm period before the disclosure of the test result and seemed to postpone distressing thoughts until the week of disclosure of the result. The low distress levels may partly be explained by the use of strategies to minimise the emotional impact of a possibly unfavourable test outcome. However, a minority reported feeling very distressed. Several factors were found to be predictive for increased distress levels.     

Low rates of acceptance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 test results among African American women at increased risk for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated rates of BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) test result acceptance among African American women and identified determinants of test result acceptance. METHODS: Acceptance of BRCA1/2 test results was evaluated among 157 African American women at high and moderate risk for having a BRCA1/2 mutation who were offered genetic testing as part of a clinical genetic counseling research program. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of women received BRCA1/2 test results. Test result acceptance differed between women with > or =10% prior probability of having a BRCA1/2 mutation (34%) and those who had a 5% prior probability (8%). Among women with > or =10% prior probability, test result acceptors were most likely to be married (OR = 5.29, 95% CI = 1.82, 15.38, P = 0.002) and be less certain about their risk of developing cancer (OR = 3.18, 95% CI = 1.04, 9.80, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that acceptance of BRCA1/2 test results may be limited among African American women. Being married and having less certainty about one's cancer risk may motivate acceptance of BRCA1/2 test results among African American women. It may be important to emphasize the possibility that BRCA1/2 test results may not clarify cancer risks during pre-test counseling with African American women to ensure informed decision-making about testing.     

Evaluation of the needs of spouses of female carriers of mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2

The process of genetic testing involves the entire family, including spouses. The objective of this study was to measure the specific needs and to describe the experiences of spouses of women who received genetic counseling for a positive BRCA1/2 result. We surveyed 59 spouses of female mutation carriers. The mean length of relationships was 26 years (range: 2.5-50 years). All were supportive of their spouses' decision to undergo genetic testing and counselling. Four respondents stated that they wished that they had received additional support at the time of test disclosure and 20% felt that their wives had received inadequate support. One-quarter of the spouses believed that their relationship had changed because of genetic testing; most felt that they had become closer to their wives. Husbands were most concerned about the risk of their wife dying of cancer (43%), followed by the risk of their spouse developing cancer (19%) and the risk that their children would test positive for the BRCA mutation (14%). Distress levels, measured by the Impact of Event scale, suggest that few spouses were experiencing clinical levels of distress.     

Uncertainty in BRCA1 cancer susceptibility testing

This study investigated uncertainty in individuals undergoing genetic counseling/testing for breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility. Sixty-three individuals from a single kindred with a known BRCA1 mutation rated uncertainty about 12 items on a five-point Likert scale before and 1 month after genetic counseling/testing. Factor analysis identified a five-item total uncertainty scale that was sensitive to changes before and after testing. The items in the scale were related to uncertainty about obtaining health care, positive changes after testing, and coping well with results. The majority of participants (76%) rated reducing uncertainty as an important reason for genetic testing. The importance of reducing uncertainty was stable across time and unrelated to anxiety or demographics. Yet, at baseline, total uncertainty was low and decreased after genetic counseling/testing (P = 0.004). Analysis of individual items showed that after genetic counseling/testing, there was less uncertainty about the participant detecting cancer early (P = 0.005) and coping well with their result (P < 0.001). Our findings support the importance to clients of genetic counseling/testing as a means of reducing uncertainty. Testing may help clients to reduce the uncertainty about items they can control, and it may be important to differentiate the sources of uncertainty that are more or less controllable. Genetic counselors can help clients by providing anticipatory guidance about the role of uncertainty in genetic testing.     

Knowledge and attitudes of gynecologists regarding genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

In a survey we investigated whether gynecologists are sufficiently knowledgeable to perform genetic counseling. It provides information for the development and evaluation of a counseling manual for professionals in primary health care. The members of the sample, consisting of 529 gynecologists in northern Germany, were mailed a questionnaire concerning their knowledge of and attitudes towards genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The response rate was 32.5% (n = 172). The majority of the respondents (82%) have received requests from patients for genetic testing. Most would offer basic genetic counseling to their patients, 66% feel knowledgeable enough to do so. Physicians set high value on communicating clinical management options, but also consider psychosocial aspects to be important. The results suggest that HBOC genetics play a noticeable role in the practice of gynecology in Germany. There is consensus about the need for further educational training to deal with cancer genetics in physicians' daily practice.     

Genetic counseling in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer in Israel: psychosocial impact and retention of genetic information

Genetic counseling for individuals at high risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer (oncogenetic counseling) involves evaluation of cancer risk, psychological assessment, and genetic testing for germline mutations in BRCA1/BRCA2 genes. The long-term psychosocial impact of oncogenetic counseling on consultees and the retention of oncogenetic information are uncertain. We retrospectively interviewed 155 women who underwent oncogenetic counseling in a single medical center in Israel in 1996 (N = 50) and 1998 (N = 105). There were 29 (18.7%) BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers and 126 non-carriers; 58 (37.4%) had a past or present history of cancer, and 97 (62.6%) were first-degree relatives within breast/ovarian cancer families. A questionnaire evaluating self-reported distress and anxiety symptoms before and after counseling, as well as the retention of relevant information (e.g., individual and offspring cancer risk, early detection schemes), one and three years after the initial consultation was administered. Overall, oncogenetic counseling had a minimal effect on anxiety-related symptoms. Mutation carriers reported anxiety-associated symptoms, such as sleeplessness and "bad mood", more frequently than non-carriers following oncogenetic counseling. As expected, 61.8% of carriers and only 30% of non-carriers accurately remembered the personal and offspring cancer risk and preventive and early detection schemes. We conclude that although there seemed to be slight worsening of anxiety-related symptoms following oncogenetic counseling in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers, these symptoms were minimal and did not affect everyday life activities. In addition, there is an ongoing need to emphasize oncogenetic information to high-risk individuals.