Top

Supportive Care in Cancer

Published in:

01-11-2012 | Original Article

Are we being overly cautious? A qualitative inquiry into the experiences and perceptions of treatment-focused germline BRCA genetic testing amongst women recently diagnosed with breast cancer

Authors: E. Zilliacus, B. Meiser, M. Gleeson, K. Watts, K. Tucker, E. A. Lobb, G. Mitchell

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 11/2012

Abstract

Purpose

Women with breast cancer, who are found to be BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, have a high risk of ovarian cancer and metachronous breast cancer. Treatment-focused genetic testing (TFGT), offered around the time of diagnosis, allows genetic test results to inform surgical treatment decisions. However, concern has been raised that offering TFGT at this time may overly increase psychological burden. This study aimed to qualitatively explore women’s attitudes and experiences of TFGT.

Methods

Women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer at age 50 years or less undertook a semi-structured telephone interview (n = 26). The sample included women who had been offered TFGT, based on family history and/or other risk criteria (n = 14), and women who had been diagnosed within the past 6–12 months and had not been offered TFGT (n = 12). Interviews explored women’s attitudes towards TFGT, perceived benefits and disadvantages, implications of TFGT and impact on surgical decision making. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

Results

Women expressed positive attitudes towards TFGT and felt it was highly relevant to their surgical decision making. They did not feel that an offer of TFGT shortly after, or at the time of diagnosis, added undue psychological burden. The majority of women interviewed felt that TFGT should be incorporated into standard clinical care.

Conclusions

TFGT is viewed favourably by women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to examine the long-term impact of TFGT. We conclude that an offer of TFGT is not perceived as ‘too much, too soon’ by relevant patients.

Lalloo F et al (2003) Prediction of pathogenic mutations in patients with early-onset breast cancer by family history. Lancet 361:1101PubMedCrossRef

Choi D et al (2004) Incidence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in young Korean breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 22(9):1638–1645PubMedCrossRef

Loman N et al (2001) Family history of breast and ovarian cancers and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population-based series of early-onset cancer. J Nat Cancer Inst 93:1215–1223PubMedCrossRef

Martinez-Ferrandis J et al (2003) Mutational analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Mediterranean Spanish women with early-onset breast cancer: identification of three novel pathogenic mutations. Hum Mutat 22(5):417–418PubMedCrossRef

Rubenstein W (2008) Hereditary breast cancer: pathobiology, clinical translation, and potential for targeted cancer therapeutics. Fam Cancer 7(1):83–89CrossRef

Silva E (2008) Genetic counselling and clinical management of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients at genetic risk for BRCA germline mutations: perspective of a surgical oncologist. Familial Cancer 7:91–95PubMedCrossRef

Domcheck S, Weber B (2006) Clinical management of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Oncogene 25:5825–5831CrossRef

Narod S, Orrit K (2005) Prevention and management of hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:1656–1663PubMedCrossRef

Pierce L, Strawderman M, Narod S (2000) Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving treatment in women with breast cancer and germline BRCA1/2 mutations. J Clin Oncol 18:3360–3369PubMed

10.

Hartmann L et al (1999) Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a family history of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 340(2):77–84PubMedCrossRef

11.

Schwartz M (2005) Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: efficacy, satisfaction, and regret. J Clin Oncol 23(31):7777–7779PubMedCrossRef

12.

Eisen A et al (2000) Prophylactic surgery in women with a hereditary predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 18(9):1980–1995PubMed

13.

Kauff ND, Satogopan JM, Robson ME (2002) Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med 346(21):1609–1615PubMedCrossRef

14.

Schwartz C et al (2004) Impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 counseling and testing on newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 22(10):1823–1829PubMedCrossRef

15.

Meiser B et al (2008) 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(6):216PubMedCrossRef

16.

Palomares M, Paz B, Weitzel J (2005) Genetic cancer risk assessment in the newly diagnosed breast cancer patient is useful and possible in practice. J Clin Oncol 23(13):3165–3166PubMedCrossRef

17.

Weitzel J et al (2003) Effect of genetic cancer risk assessment on surgical decisions at breast cancer diagnosis. Arch Surg 138:1323–1328PubMedCrossRef

18.

Stolier A et al (2004) Initial experience with surgical treatment planning in the newly diagnosed breast cancer patient at high risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation [see comment]. Breast J 10:475–480PubMedCrossRef

19.

Schwartz M et al (2005) Utilization of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14(4):1003–1007PubMedCrossRef

20.

Schlich-Bakker KJ et al (2006) Short term psychological distress in patients actively approached for genetic counselling after diagnosis of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 42(16):2722–2728PubMedCrossRef

21.

Schlich-Bakker KJ et al (2007) Barriers to participating in genetic counseling and BRCA testing during primary treatment for breast cancer. Genet Med 9(11):766–777PubMedCrossRef

22.

NHMRC (1999) Clinical practice guidelines: familial aspects of cancer: a guide to clinical practice. NHMRC, Canberra

23.

Australian Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing (2008) Private Health Insurance Administration Council. October 10, 2008. Available from http://www.phiac.gov.au/

24.

Meiser B et al (2011) Getting to the point: what women newly diagnosed with breast cancer want to know about treatment-focused genetic testing. Oncol Nurs Forum 39(2):E101–E111

25.

Miles M, Huberman M (1984) Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook for new methods. Sage, Beverly Hills

26.

Denzin JM, Lincoln YS (eds) (1994) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, London

27.

Wood M et al (2000) Impact of BRCA1 testing on women with cancer: a pilot study. Genet Test 4(3):265–272PubMedCrossRef

28.

van Roosmalen M et al (2004) 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 124:346–355CrossRef

29.

Ardern-Jones A, Kenen R, Eeles R (2005) Too much too soon? Patients’ and health professionals’ views concerning the impact of genetic testing at the time of breast cancer diagnosis in women under the age of 40. Eur J Cancer Care 14:272–281CrossRef

30.

Vadaparampil ST et al (2011) Satisfaction with physician recommendation for and information about genetic counselling among breast cancer patients. The Breast J 17(1):79–82CrossRef

31.

Lobb E et al (2010) Treatment focussed DNA testing in newly diagnosed cancer patients: some implications for clinical practice. Clin Gen 77(4):350–354CrossRef

32.

Schlich-Bakker KJ et al (2008) BRCA 1/2 mutation testing in breast cancer patients: a prospective study of the long-term psychological impact of approach during adjuvant radiotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109(3):507–514PubMedCrossRef

33.

Tercyak KP et al (2007) Quality of life after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in newly diagnosed high-risk breast cancer patients who underwent BRCA1/2. J Clin Oncol 25(3):285–291PubMedCrossRef

Title: Are we being overly cautious? A qualitative inquiry into the experiences and perceptions of treatment-focused germline BRCA genetic testing amongst women recently diagnosed with breast cancer
Authors: E. Zilliacus
B. Meiser
M. Gleeson
K. Watts
K. Tucker
E. A. Lobb
G. Mitchell
Publication date: 01-11-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 11/2012
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1427-6

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

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2012

A qualitative study exploring the experience of the partners of cancer survivors and their views on the role of primary care

Hepatitis B virus management to prevent reactivation after chemotherapy: a review

Retraction Note: Abstracts of the 2010 International MASCC/ISOO Symposium

Bisphosphonates in the treatment of patients with lung cancer and metastatic bone disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

High incidence of bloodstream infection detected by surveillance blood cultures in hematology patients on corticosteroid therapy

Health-related quality of life anticipated with different management strategies for febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer