Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Anesthesiology Cardiology Dermatology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology General Medicine Geriatrics Hematology Infectious Diseases Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Obstetrics and Gynecology Oncology Ophthalmology Pediatrics Psychiatry Radiology Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery Urology
Congress Coverage
ASH 2024 Annual Meeting 2024 ESMO Congress 2024 ERS Congress 2024 EASD Congress 2024 ESC Congress 2024 EAN Congress 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on adolescent vaping

Growing numbers of young people are using e-cigarettes, despite warnings of respiratory effects and addiction. How can doctors tackle the epidemic, and what health effects should you prepare to manage in your clinics?

Watch the on-demand webinar
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Familial Cancer
Published in:

Open Access 09-05-2024 | Prostate Cancer | Original Article

Men with metastatic prostate cancer carrying a pathogenic germline variant in breast cancer genes: disclosure of genetic test results to relatives

Authors: Michiel Vlaming, Margreet G. E. M. Ausems, Gina Schijven, Inge M. van Oort, C. Marleen Kets, Fenne L. Komdeur, Lizet E. van der Kolk, Rogier A. Oldenburg, Rolf H. Sijmons, Lambertus A. L. M. Kiemeney, Eveline M. A. Bleiker

Published in: Familial Cancer | Issue 2/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Some patients with metastatic prostate cancer carry a pathogenic germline variant (PV) in a gene, that is mainly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in women. If they test positive for such a PV, prostate cancer patients are encouraged to disclose the genetic test result to relatives who are at risk in case the carrier status changes the relatives’ medical care. Our study aimed to investigate how men who learned they carry a PV in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2 or ATM disclosed their carrier status to at-risk relatives and to assess the possible psychological burden for the carrier and their perception of the burden for relatives. In total, 23 men with metastatic prostate cancer carrying a PV completed the IRI questionnaire about family communication; 14 also participated in a semi-structured interview. Patients felt highly confident in discussing the genetic test result with relatives. The diagnosis of prostate cancer was experienced as a burden, whereas being informed about genetic testing results did in most cases not add to this burden. Two patients encountered negative experiences with family communication, as they considered the genetic test result to be more urgent than their relatives. This mixed-methods study shows that metastatic prostate cancer patients with a PV in genes mainly associated with increased risk of breast cancer feel well-equipped to communicate about this predisposition in their families. Carriers felt motivated to disclose their genetic test result to relatives. Most of them indicated that the disclosure was not experienced as a psychological burden.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Sung H et al (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249CrossRefPubMed
2.
Buzzoni C et al (2015) Metastatic prostate cancer incidence and prostate-specific antigen testing: new insights from the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 68(5):885–890PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Hamdy FC et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375(15):1415–1424PubMedCrossRef
4.
Abdi B et al (2022) DNA damage repair gene germline profiling for metastatic prostate cancer patients of different ancestries. Prostate 82(12):1196–1201PubMedCrossRef
5.
Abida W et al (2017) Prospective genomic profiling of prostate cancer across disease states reveals germline and somatic alterations that may affect clinical decision making. JCO Precis Oncol 1:1–16CrossRef
6.
Boyle JL et al (2020) Pathogenic germline DNA repair gene and HOXB13 mutations in men with metastatic prostate cancer. JCO Precis Oncol 4:139–151CrossRef
7.
Castro E et al (2019) PROREPAIR-B: a prospective cohort study of the impact of germline DNA repair mutations on the outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 37(6):490–503PubMedCrossRef
8.
Giri VN et al (2017) Inherited mutations in men undergoing multigene panel testing for prostate cancer: emerging implications for personalized prostate cancer genetic evaluation. JCO Precis Oncol 1:1–17CrossRef
9.
Greenberg SE et al (2021) Clinical germline testing results of men with prostate cancer: patient-level factors and implications of NCCN guideline expansion. JCO Precis Oncol 5:533–542CrossRef
10.
Hart SN et al (2016) Determining the frequency of pathogenic germline variants from exome sequencing in patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer. BMJ Open 6(4):e010332PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Isaacsson Velho P et al (2018) Intraductal/ductal histology and lymphovascular invasion are associated with germline DNA-repair gene mutations in prostate cancer. Prostate 78(5):401–407PubMedCrossRef
12.
Na R et al (2017) Germline mutations in ATM and BRCA1/2 distinguish risk for lethal and indolent prostate cancer and are associated with early age at death. Eur Urol 71(5):740–747PubMedCrossRef
13.
Nguyen-Dumont T et al (2021) Rare germline pathogenic variants identified by multigene panel testing and the risk of aggressive prostate cancer. Cancers 13(7):1495PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Nicolosi P et al (2019) Prevalence of germline variants in prostate cancer and implications for current genetic testing guidelines. JAMA Oncol 5(4):523–528PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
Petrovics G et al (2019) Increased frequency of germline BRCA2 mutations associates with prostate cancer metastasis in a racially diverse patient population. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22(3):406–410PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
18.
19.
Yadav S et al (2019) Contribution of inherited DNA-repair gene mutations to hormone-sensitive and castrate-resistant metastatic prostate cancer and implications for clinical outcome. JCO Precis Oncol 3:1–12CrossRef
20.
Bychkovsky BL et al (2022) Differences in cancer phenotypes among frequent CHEK2 Variants and implications for clinical care—checking CHEK2. JAMA Oncol 8(11):1598–1606PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Hall MJ et al (2021) Germline pathogenic variants in the ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) gene are associated with high and moderate risks for multiple cancers germline ATM PVs are associated with multiple cancer risks. Cancer Prev Res 14(4):433–440CrossRef
22.
23.
Yang X et al (2020) Cancer risks associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants: an international study of 524 families. J Clin Oncol 38(7):674PubMedCrossRef
24.
25.
Carbine NE et al (2018) Risk-reducing mastectomy for the prevention of primary breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4(4):CD002748PubMed
26.
Ludwig KK et al (2016) Risk reduction and survival benefit of prophylactic surgery in BRCA mutation carriers, a systematic review. The American Journal of Surgery 212(4):660–669PubMedCrossRef
27.
Wood ME, McKinnon W, Garber J (2020) Risk for breast cancer and management of unaffected individuals with non-BRCA hereditary breast cancer. Breast J 26(8):1528–1534PubMedCrossRef
28.
Page EC et al (2019) Interim results from the IMPACT study: evidence for prostate-specific antigen screening in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Eur Urol 76(6):831–842PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
de Bono JS et al (2021) Talazoparib monotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with DNA repair alterations (TALAPRO-1): an open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 22(9):1250–1264PubMedCrossRef
30.
31.
Hussain M et al (2020) Survival with olaparib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 383(24):2345–2357PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Dheensa S, Lucassen A, Fenwick A (2018) Limitations and pitfalls of using family letters to communicate genetic risk: a qualitative study with patients and healthcare professionals. J Genet Couns 27:689–701PubMedCrossRef
34.
Finn CM et al (2023) Motivation and family communication in hereditary prostate cancer genetic testing: survey of patients from a US tertiary medical center. J Genet Couns 32(1):79–89PubMedCrossRef
35.
Leader AE et al (2022) Insight into how patients with prostate cancer interpret and communicate genetic test results: implications for families. J Community Genet 13(6):547–556PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Vlaming M et al (2022) Mainstream germline genetic testing in men with metastatic prostate cancer: design and protocol for a multicenter observational study. BMC Cancer 22(1):1365PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Kroll T, Neri M (2009) Designs for mixed methods research. Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 31–49
38.
Kuper A, Lingard L, Levinson W (2008) Critically appraising qualitative research. BMJ 337:a1035–a1035PubMedCrossRef
39.
40.
de Geus E et al (2015) Development of the informing relatives inventory (IRI): assessing index patients’ knowledge, motivation and self-efficacy regarding the disclosure of hereditary cancer risk information to relatives. Int J Behav Med 22:551–560PubMedCrossRef
41.
Claes E et al (2003) Communication with close and distant relatives in the context of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients. Am J Med Genet A 116(1):11–19CrossRef
42.
Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101CrossRef
43.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J (2007) Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 19(6):349–357PubMedCrossRef
44.
Menko FH et al (2019) The uptake of presymptomatic genetic testing in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome: a systematic review of the literature and implications for clinical practice. Fam Cancer 18:127–135PubMedCrossRef
45.
46.
Piovesana A, Senior G (2018) How small is big: sample size and skewness. Assessment 25(6):793–800PubMedCrossRef
47.
Bradbury AR et al (2016) Patient feedback and early outcome data with a novel tiered-binned model for multiplex breast cancer susceptibility testing. Genet Med 18(1):25–33PubMedCrossRef
48.
Kroneman M et al (2016) Netherlands: health system review. Health Syst Transit 18(2):1–240PubMed
49.
Van Der Heide I et al (2013) The relationship between health, education, and health literacy: results from the Dutch adult literacy and life skills survey. J Health Commun 18(sup1):172–184PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Harrison C et al (2023) Family communication and results disclosure after germline sequencing: a mixed methods study. Patient Educ Couns 114:107800PubMedCrossRef
51.
Sanz J et al (2010) Uptake of predictive testing among relatives of BRCA1 and BRCA2 families: a multicenter study in northeastern Spain. Fam Cancer 9:297–304PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Men with metastatic prostate cancer carrying a pathogenic germline variant in breast cancer genes: disclosure of genetic test results to relatives
Authors
Michiel Vlaming
Margreet G. E. M. Ausems
Gina Schijven
Inge M. van Oort
C. Marleen Kets
Fenne L. Komdeur
Lizet E. van der Kolk
Rogier A. Oldenburg
Rolf H. Sijmons
Lambertus A. L. M. Kiemeney
Eveline M. A. Bleiker
Publication date
09-05-2024
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Familial Cancer / Issue 2/2024
Print ISSN: 1389-9600
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7292
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-024-00377-0

Other articles of this Issue 2/2024

Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs

Cascade testing for hereditary cancer in Singapore: how population genomics help guide clinical policy

Cascade screening in HBOC and Lynch syndrome: guidelines and procedures in a UK centre

Cascade genetic counseling and testing in hereditary syndromes: inherited cardiovascular disease as a model: a narrative review

Editorial for familial cancer: cascade genetic testing

Clinician perspectives on policy approaches to genetic risk disclosure in families

  • Open Access
  • Original Article

ASH 2024 Annual Meeting Coverage

inMIND supports tafasitamab addition in follicular lymphoma

Combining tafasitamab with lenalidomide and rituximab significantly improves progression-free survival for patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma.

Featuring the official presentation video

Read more

Transplantation can be omitted for certain MCL patients

Add-on blinatumomab improves DFS in children with ALL

Promising response to loncastuximab tesirine in lymphoma

» View more highlights on the ASH 2024 hub page

SPONSORED

Recent advances in the use of CAR T-cell therapies in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma

In this webinar, Professor Martin Dreyling and an esteemed international panel of CAR T-cell therapy experts discuss the latest data on the safety, efficacy, and clinical impact of CAR T-cell therapies in the treatment of r/r DLBCL and r/r FL.

Please note, this webinar is not intended for healthcare professionals based in the US and UK.

Sponsored by:
  • Novartis Pharma AG
Chaired by: Prof. Martin Dreyling
Developed by: Springer Healthcare
Watch now
Image Credits