Top

Published in:

01-10-2009 | Original Research

The Effect of BRCA Gene Testing on Family Relationships: A Thematic Analysis of Qualitative Interviews

Authors: Heather A. Douglas, Rebekah J. Hamilton, Robin E. Grubs

Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Issue 5/2009

Abstract

Discovery of mutations in the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 can have emotional consequences for both the tested individual and his or her relatives. This secondary analysis study investigated how BRCA testing impacts family dynamics and relationships. For the original study, a grounded theory inquiry, participants were recruited from a hereditary breast/ovarian cancer syndrome support website and open-ended interviews were performed asking about individual and family experiences after BRCA testing. All 12 participants whose interviews were included in the secondary analysis had a BRCA mutation. For the secondary analysis, thematic analysis was conducted and revealed three main themes characterizing the effect of BRCA testing on family relationships: 1. That the first in the family to have testing or seek genetic counseling takes on a special family role that can be difficult for them; 2. That discussions in the family often change; and 3. That individuals may feel more or less connected to certain family members. These changes seemed to relate to family cancer history, relationships, coping strategies, communication patterns, and mutation status. Genetic counselors might find it useful to explore these issues in order to prepare clients before BRCA testing and to support them through shifts in family dynamics after disclosure of results.

Available only for authorised users

Bakos, A. D., Hutson, S. P., Loud, J. T., Peters, J. A., Giusti, R. M., & Greene, M. H. (2008). BRCA mutation-negative women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: a qualitative study of the BRCA-negative experience. Health Expectations, 11(3), 220–231.PubMedCrossRef

Beeson, D. (1997). Nuance, complexity, and context: qualitative methods in genetic counseling research. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 6(1), 21–43.PubMedCrossRef

Blandy, C., Chabal, F., Stoppa-Lyonnet, D., & Julian-Reynier, C. (2003). Testing participation in BRCA1/2-positive families: initiator role of index cases. Genetic Testing, 7(3), 225–233.PubMedCrossRef

Bradbury, A. R., Dignam, J. J., Ibe, C. N., Auh, S. L., Hlubocky, F. J., Cummings, S. A., et al. (2007). How often do BRCA mutation carriers tell their young children of the family’s risk for cancer? A study of parental disclosure of BRCA mutations to minors and young adults. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25(24), 3705–3711.PubMedCrossRef

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.CrossRef

Bredart, A., Autier, P., Audisio, R. A., & Geragthy, J. (1998). Psycho-social aspects of breast cancer susceptibility testing: a literature review. European Journal of Cancer Care, 7, 174–180.PubMedCrossRef

Carlsson, C., & Nilbert, M. (2007). Living with hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer; experiences from and impact of genetic testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16(6), 811–820.PubMedCrossRef

Claes, E., Evers-Kiebooms, G., Boogaerts, A., Decruyenaere, M., Denayer, L., & Legius, E. (2003). Communication with close and distant relatives in the context of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 116A, 11–19.PubMedCrossRef

Costalas, J. W., Itzen, M., Malick, J., Babb, J. S., Bove, B., Godwin, A. K., et al. (2003). Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: a cancer risk assessment program’s experience. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 119C, 11–18.CrossRef

d’Agincourt-Canning, L. (2001). Experiences of genetic risk: disclosure and the gendering of responsibility. Bioethics, 15(3), 231–247.PubMedCrossRef

d’Agincourt-Canning, L. (2006). A gift or a yoke? Women’s and men’s responses to genetic risk information from BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. Clinical Genetics, 70, 462–472.PubMedCrossRef

Daly, M., Farmer, J., Harrop-Stein, C., Montgomery, S., Itzen, M., Costalas, J., et al. (1999). Exploring family relationships in cancer risk counseling using the genogram. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 8, 393–398.

Daly, M. B., Barsevick, A., Miller, S. M., Buckman, R., Costalas, J., Montgomery, S., et al. (2001). Communicating genetic test results to the family: a six-step, skills-building strategy. Family and Community Health, 24(3), 13–26.PubMed

Deatrick, J. A., Knafl, K. A., & Guyer, K. (1993). The meaning of caregiving behaviors: Inductive approaches to family theory development. In S. L. Featham, S. B. Meister, J. M. Bell & C. L. Gillis (Eds.), The nursing of families: Theory/research/education/practice, pp. 38–45. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

DudokdeWit, A. C., Tibben, A., Frets, P. G., Meijers-Heijboer, E. J., Devilee, P., Klijn, J. G. M., et al. (1997). BRCA1 in the family: a case description of the psychological implications. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 71, 63–71.PubMedCrossRef

Duncan, R. E., Gillam, L., Savulescu, J., Williamson, R., Rogers, J. G., & Delatycki, M. B. (2008). “You’re one of us now”: young people describe their experiences of predictive genetic testing for Huntington disease (HD) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C (Seminars in Medical Genetics), 148C, 47–55.CrossRef

Eunpu, D. L. (1997). Systemically-based psychotherapeutic techniques in genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 6(1), 1–20.CrossRef

Forrest, K., Simpson, S. A., Wilson, B. J., van Teijlingen, E. R., McKee, L., Haites, N., et al. (2003). To tell or not to tell: barriers and facilitators in family communication about genetic risk. Clinical Genetics, 64, 317–326.PubMedCrossRef

Foster, C., Watson, M., Moynihan, C., Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2002). Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition: cancer burden and responsibility. Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 469–484.CrossRef

Foster, C., Evans, D. G. R., Eeles, R., Eccles, D., Ashley, S., Brooks, L., et al. (2004). Non-uptake of predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 among relatives of known carriers: attributes, cancer worry, and barriers to testing in a multicenter clinical cohort. Genetic Testing, 8(1), 23–29.PubMedCrossRef

Goelen, G., Rigo, A., Bonduelle, M., & De Greve, J. (1999). Moral concerns of different types of patients in clinical BRCA1/2 gene mutation testing. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17(5), 1595–1600.PubMed

Green, J., Richards, M., Murton, F., Statham, H., & Hallowell, N. (1997). Family communication and genetic counseling: the case of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 6(1), 45–60.CrossRef

Hallowell, N. (1999). Doing the right thing: genetic risk and responsibility. Sociology of Health & Illness, 21(5), 597–621.CrossRef

Hallowell, N., Foster, C., Eeles, R., Arden-Jones, A., Murday, V., & Watson, M. (2003). Balancing autonomy and responsibility: the ethics of generating and disclosing genetic information. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29, 74–83.PubMedCrossRef

Hallowell, N., Foster, C., Eeles, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Watson, M. (2004). Accommodating risk: responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer. Social Science & Medicine, 59, 553–565.CrossRef

Hallowell, N., Ardern-Jones, A., Eeles, R., Foster, C., & Lucassen, A. (2005a). Communication about genetic testing in families of male BRCA1/2 carriers and non-carriers: patterns, priorities and problems. Clinical Genetics, 67, 492–502.PubMedCrossRef

Hallowell, N., Ardern-Jones, A., Eeles, R., Foster, C., Lucassen, A., Moynihan, C., et al. (2005b). Men’s decision-making about predictive BRCA1/2 testing: the role of family. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 14(3), 207–17.PubMedCrossRef

Hamilton, R. J. (2003). Experiencing predictive genetic testing in families with Huntington’s disease and hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Unpublished Dissertation, Madison, WI.

Hamilton, R. J., & Bowers, B. J. (2006). Internet recruitment and e-mail interviews in qualitative studies. Qualitative Health Research, 16(6), 821–835.PubMedCrossRef

Hamilton, R. J., & Bowers, B. J. (2007). The theory of genetic vulnerability: a Roy model exemplar. Nursing Science Quarterly, 20(3), 254–265.PubMedCrossRef

Hamilton, R. J., Bowers, B. J., & Williams, J. K. (2005). Disclosing genetic test results to family members. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 37(1), 18–24.PubMedCrossRef

Hamilton, R. J., Williams, J. K., Bowers, B. J., & Calzone, K. (2009). Life trajectories, genetic testing, and risk reduction decisions in 18–39 year old women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, doi:10.1007/s10897-008-9200-1.

Hinds, P. S., Vogel, R. J., & Clarke-Steffen, L. (1997). The possibilities and pitfalls of doing secondary analysis of a qualitative data set. Qualitative Health Research, 7(3), 408–424.CrossRef

Hughes, C., Lerman, C., Schwartz, M., Peshkin, B. N., Wenzel, L., Narod, S., et al. (2002). All in the family: evaluation of the process and content of sisters’ communication about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 107, 143–150.PubMedCrossRef

Kenen, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2003a). Living with chronic risk: healthy women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer. Health, Risk & Society, 5(3), 315–331.CrossRef

Kenen, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2003b). Family stories and the use of heuristics: women from suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families. Sociology of Health & Illness, 25(7), 838–865.CrossRef

Kenen, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2004). We are talking, but are they listening? Communication patterns in families with a history of breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC). Psycho-Oncology, 13, 335–345.PubMedCrossRef

Kenen, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2006). “Social separation” among women under 40 years of age diagnosed with breast cancer and carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15(3), 150–162.CrossRef

Kenen, R. H., Shapiro, P. J., Hantsoo, L., Friedman, S., & Coyne, J. C. (2007). Women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations renegotiating a post-prophylactic mastectomy identity: self-image and self-disclosure. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16, 789–798.PubMedCrossRef

Knafl, K. A., Ayers, L., Gallo, A. M., Zoeller, L. H., & Breitmayer, B. J. (1995). Learning from stories: parent’s accounts of pathways to diagnosis. Pediatric Nursing, 21(5), 4122–4415.

Loader, S., Shields, C. G., & Rowley, P. T. (2004). Impact of genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. Genetic Testing, 8(1), 1–12.PubMedCrossRef

Loud, J. T., Weissman, N. E., Peters, J. A., Giusti, R. M., Wilfond, B. S., Burke, W., et al. (2006). Deliberate deceit of family members: a challenge to providers of clinical genetics services. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24(10), 1643–1646.PubMedCrossRef

MacDonald, D. J., Sarna, L., van Servellen, G., Bastani, R., Giger, J. N., & Weitzel, J. N. (2007). Selection of family members for communication of cancer risk and barriers to this communication before and after genetic cancer risk assessment. Genetics in Medicine, 9(5), 275–282.PubMedCrossRef

McGivern, G., Everett, J., Yager, G. G., Baumiller, R. C., Hafertepen, A., & Saal, H. M. (2004). Family communication about positive BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results. Genetics in Medicine, 6(6), 503–509.PubMedCrossRef

McInerney-Leo, A., Biesecker, B., Hadley, D. W., Kase, R. G., Giambarresi, T. R., Johnson, E., et al. (2005). BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: impact on relationships. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 133A, 165–169.PubMedCrossRef

Patenaude, A. F., Dorval, M., DiGianni, L. S., Schneider, K. A., Chittenden, A., et al. (2006). Sharing BRCA1/2 test results with first-degree relatives: factors predicting who women tell. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24(4), 700–706.PubMedCrossRef

Peters, J. A., Hoskins, L., Prindiville, S., Kenen, R., & Greene, M. H. (2006). Evolution of the colored eco-genetic relationship map (CEGRM) for assessing social functioning in women in hereditary breast-ovarian (HBOC) families. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15(6), 477–489.PubMedCrossRef

Phelps, C., Wood, F., Bennett, P., Brain, K., & Gray, J. (2007). Knowledge and expectations of women undergoing cancer genetic risk assessment: a qualitative analysis of free-text questionnaire comments. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16(4), 505–14.PubMedCrossRef

Raveis, V. H., & Pretter, S. (2005). Existential plight of adult daughters following their mother’s breast cancer diagnosis. Psycho-Oncology, 14, 49–60.PubMedCrossRef

Richards, L., & Morse, J. M. (2007). Coding. In Readme first for a user’s guide to qualitative methods (2nd ed., pp. 133-151). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Smith, K. R., West, J. A., Croyle, R. T., & Botkin, J. R. (1999). Familial context of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: moderating effect of siblings’ test results on psychological distress one to two weeks after BRCA1 mutation testing. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 8, 385–392.

Sobel, S., & Cowan, D. B. (2000). Impact of genetic testing for Huntington disease on the family system. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 90, 49–59.PubMedCrossRef

Sobel, S., & Cowan, C. B. (2003). Ambiguous loss and disenfranchised grief: the impact of DNA predictive testing on the family as a system. Family Process, 42(1), 47–57.PubMedCrossRef

Speice, J., McDaniel, S. H., Rowley, P. T., & Loader, S. (2002). Family issues in a psychoeducation group for women with a BRCA mutation. Clinical Genetics, 62, 121–127.PubMedCrossRef

Stroup, A. M., & Smith, K. R. (2007). Familial effects of BRCA1 genetic mutation testing: changes in perceived family functioning. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 16, 135–141.CrossRef

Tercyak, K. P., Peshkin, B. N., DeMarco, T. A., Farkas Patenaude, A., Schneider, K. A., Garber, J. E., et al. (2007). Information needs of mothers regarding communicating BRCA1/2 cancer genetic test results to their children. Genetic Testing, 11(3), 249–255.PubMedCrossRef

Thorne, S. (1994). Secondary analysis in qualitative research: issues and implications. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (1st ed.), pp. 263–279. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Van Dijk, S., Van Asperen, C. J., Jacobi, C. E., Vink, G. R., Tibben, A., Breuning, M. H., et al. (2004). Variants of uncertain clinical significance as a result of BRCA1/2 testing: impact of an ambiguous breast cancer risk message. Genetic Testing, 8(3), 235–239.PubMedCrossRef

Van Oostrom, I., Meijers-Heijboer, H., Lodder, L. N., Duivenvoorden, H. J., van Gool, A. R., Seynaeve, C., et al. (2003). Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21, 3867–3874.PubMedCrossRef

Watson, M., Foster, C., Eeles, R., Eccles, D., Ashley, S., Davidson, R., et al. (2004). Psychosocial impact of breast/ovarian (BRCA1/2) cancer-predictive genetic testing in a UK multi-centre clinical cohort. British Journal of Cancer, 91, 1787–1794.PubMedCrossRef

Weitzel, J. N., Lagos, V. I., Cullinane, C. A., Gambol, P. J., Culver, J. O., Blazer, K. R., et al. (2007). Limited family structure and BRCA mutation status in single cases of breast cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, 297(23), 2587–2595.PubMedCrossRef

Werner-Lin, A. V. (2007). Danger zones: risk perceptions of young women from families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Family Process, 46(3), 335–349.PubMedCrossRef

Title: The Effect of BRCA Gene Testing on Family Relationships: A Thematic Analysis of Qualitative Interviews
Authors: Heather A. Douglas
Rebekah J. Hamilton
Robin E. Grubs
Publication date: 01-10-2009
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Issue 5/2009
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-009-9232-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

The Effect of BRCA Gene Testing on Family Relationships: A Thematic Analysis of Qualitative Interviews

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2009

A Remembrance of Dr. George Tiller

Parents’ Perceptions of Autism Spectrum Disorder Etiology and Recurrence Risk and Effects of their Perceptions on Family Planning: Recommendations for Genetic Counselors

Challenges Faced by Genetics Service Providers’ Practicing in a Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Population: An Australian Experience

Psychosocial Impact of Familial Adenomatous Polyposis on Young Adults: A Qualitative Study

Telephoned BRCA1/2 Genetic Test Results: Prevalence, Practice, and Patient Satisfaction

A Cross Sectional Study Exploring Factors Impacting Recruitment of African American College Students into the Genetic Counseling Profession