Top

Published in:

01-12-2011

Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results to health care providers following genetic testing at a tertiary care center

Authors: K. Ready, B. K. Arun, K. M. Schmeler, A. Uyei, J. K. Litton, K. H. Lu, C. C. Sun, S. K. Peterson

Published in: Familial Cancer | Issue 4/2011

Abstract

Individuals at high risk for hereditary cancers often receive genetic counseling and testing at tertiary care centers; however, they may receive care for long-term management of their cancer risk in community settings. Communication of genetic test results to health care providers outside of tertiary care settings can facilitate the long-term management of high risk individuals. This study assessed women’s communication of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic test results to health care providers outside of tertiary care settings (termed “outside” health care providers, or OHCPs) and women’s perceptions regarding communication of results. Women (n = 312) who underwent BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic counseling and testing completed a questionnaire assessing whether or not they shared test results with OHCPs and perceptions regarding the communication of test results to OHCPs. Most (72%) shared genetic test results with OHCPs. Women with no personal history of cancer were more likely to have shared results compared to women with a personal history of cancer. Mutation status did not significantly predict sharing of genetic information. Most reported positive perceptions regarding the disclosure of genetic test results to OHCPs. The majority did not report any concerns about potential insurance discrimination (88%) and indicated that OHCPs were able to appropriately address their questions (81%). Although most women shared their genetic test results with OHCPs, those with a personal history of cancer may need further encouragement to share this information. Tertiary care centers should facilitate outreach and education with OHCPs in order to assure appropriate long-term cancer risk management for high risk populations.

Chen S, Parmigiani G (2007) Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance. J Clin Oncol 25:1329–1333PubMedCrossRef

Ford D, Easton DF, Bishop DT et al (1994) Risks of cancer in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Breast cancer linkage consortium. Lancet 343:692–695PubMedCrossRef

Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M et al (1998) Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. The breast cancer linkage consortium. Am J Hum Genet 62:676–689PubMedCrossRef

Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W et al (2007) American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 57:75–89PubMedCrossRef

King MC, Wieand S, Hale K et al (2001) Tamoxifen and breast cancer incidence among women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP-P1) breast cancer prevention trial. JAMA 286:2251–2256PubMedCrossRef

Narod SA, Brunet JS, Ghadirian P et al (2000) Tamoxifen and risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a case-control study. Hereditary Breast Cancer Clinical Study Group. Lancet 356:1876–1881PubMedCrossRef

Antoniou AC, Rookus M, Andrieu N et al (2009) Reproductive and hormonal factors, and ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the International BRCA1/2 Carrier Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18:601–610PubMedCrossRef

McLaughlin JR, Risch HA, Lubinski J et al (2007) Reproductive risk factors for ovarian cancer in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: a case-control study. Lancet Oncol 8:26–34PubMedCrossRef

Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Schaid DJ et al (2001) Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:1633–1637PubMedCrossRef

10.

Meijers-Heijboer H, van Geel B, van Putten WL et al (2001) Breast cancer after prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med 345:159–164PubMedCrossRef

11.

Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT et al (2004) Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol 22:1055–1062PubMedCrossRef

12.

Kauff ND, Satagopan JM, Robson ME et al (2002) Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med 346:1609–1615PubMedCrossRef

13.

Rebbeck TR, Levin AM, Eisen A et al (1999) Breast cancer risk after bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:1475–1479PubMedCrossRef

14.

Rebbeck TR, Lynch HT, Neuhausen SL et al (2002) Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med 346:1616–1622PubMedCrossRef

15.

Olopade OI, Artioli G (2004) Efficacy of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 mutations. Breast J 10(Suppl 1):5–9CrossRef

16.

Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Plevritis SK (2009) Survival analysis of cancer risk reduction strategies for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol 28:222–231PubMedCrossRef

17.

McInerney JD (2008) Genetics education for health professionals: a context. J Genet Couns 17:145–151PubMedCrossRef

18.

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 103 (2009) Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 113:957–966

19.

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian (2009) www.nccn.org. Retrieved 10 Jan 2010

20.

Nelson HD, Huffman LH, Fu R et al (2005) Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: systematic evidence review for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 143:362–379PubMed

21.

Lancaster JM, Powell CB, Kauff ND et al (2007) Society of gynecologic oncologists education committee statement on risk assessment for inherited gynecologic cancer predispositions. Gynecol Oncol 107:159–162PubMedCrossRef

22.

Acton RT, Burst NM, Casebeer L et al (2000) Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of Alabama’s primary care physicians regarding cancer genetics. Acad Med 75:850–852PubMedCrossRef

23.

Freedman AN, Wideroff L, Olson L et al (2003) US physicians’ attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Am J Med Genet A 120A:63–71PubMedCrossRef

24.

Pichert G, Dietrich D, Moosmann P et al (2003) Swiss primary care physicians’ knowledge, attitudes and perception towards genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer. Fam Cancer 2:153–158PubMedCrossRef

25.

Escher M, Sappino AP (2000) Primary care physicians’ knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer predisposition. Ann Oncol 11:1131–1135PubMedCrossRef

26.

Armstrong K, Stopfer J, Calzone K et al (2002) What does my doctor think? Preferences for knowing the doctor’s opinion among women considering clinical testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Genet Test 6:115–118PubMedCrossRef

27.

Tinley ST, Houfek J, Watson P et al (2004) Screening adherence in BRCA1/2 families is associated with primary physicians’ behavior. Am J Med Genet A 125A:5–11PubMedCrossRef

28.

Uyei A, Peterson SK, Erlichman J et al (2006) Association between clinical characteristics and risk-reduction interventions in women who underwent BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing: a single-institution study. Cancer 107:2745–2751PubMedCrossRef

29.

Litton JK, Westin SN, Ready K et al (2009) Perception of screening and risk reduction surgeries in patients tested for a BRCA deleterious mutation. Cancer 115:1598–1604PubMedCrossRef

30.

Morgan D, Sylvester H, Lucas FL et al (2010) Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: referral source for genetic assessment and communication regarding assessment with nongenetic clinicians in the community setting. Genet Med 12:25–31PubMedCrossRef

31.

Cheung WY, Neville BA, Cameron DB et al (2009) Comparisons of patient and physician expectations for cancer survivorship care. J Clin Oncol 27:2489–2495PubMedCrossRef

32.

Hall MA, McEwen JE, Barton JC et al (2005) Concerns in a primary care population about genetic discrimination by insurers. Genet Med 7:311–316PubMedCrossRef

33.

Rowley PT, Loader S (1996) Attitudes of obstetrician-gynecologists toward DNA testing for a genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. Obstet Gynecol 88:611–615PubMedCrossRef

34.

Barrison AF, Smith C, Oviedo J et al (2003) Colorectal cancer screening and familial risk: a survey of internal medicine residents’ knowledge and practice patterns. Am J Gastroenterol 98:1410–1416PubMedCrossRef

35.

Blazer KR, Grant M, Sand SR et al (2004) Effects of a cancer genetics education programme on clinician knowledge and practice. J Med Genet 41:518–522PubMedCrossRef

36.

Schroy PC 3rd, Barrison AF, Ling BS et al (2002) Family history and colorectal cancer screening: a survey of physician knowledge and practice patterns. Am J Gastroenterol 97:1031–1036PubMedCrossRef

37.

Offit K, Greene MH (2004) ASCO curriculum: cancer genetics and cancer predisposition testing, 2nd edn. ASCO Publishing, Alexandria, VA

Title: Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results to health care providers following genetic testing at a tertiary care center
Authors: K. Ready
B. K. Arun
K. M. Schmeler
A. Uyei
J. K. Litton
K. H. Lu
C. C. Sun
S. K. Peterson
Publication date: 01-12-2011
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Familial Cancer / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 1389-9600
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7292
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-011-9460-z

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

Factors affecting encouragement of relatives among families with Lynch syndrome to seek medical assessment

Limited impact on self-concept in individuals with Lynch syndrome; results from a national cohort study

Acinic cell carcinoma of the retromolar trigone region: expanding the tumor phenotype in Cowden syndrome?

Abstracts

Long-term outcomes, branch-specific expressivity, and disease-related mortality in von Hippel-Lindau type 2A

Characterization of germline mutations of MLH1 and MSH2 in unrelated south American suspected Lynch syndrome individuals

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer