Colorectal Cancer in the Family: Psychosocial Distress and Social Issues in the Years Following Genetic Counselling

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study examined: (1) levels of cancer-specific distress more than one year after genetic counselling for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC); (2) associations between sociodemographic, clinical and psychosocial factors and levels of distress; (3) the impact of genetic counselling on family relationships, and (4) social consequences of genetic counselling.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this cross-sectional study, individuals who had received genetic counselling for HNPCC during 1986–1998 completed a self-report questionnaire by mail.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>116 individuals (81% response rate) completed the questionnaire, on average 4 years after the last counselling session. Of all respondents, 6% had clinically significant levels of cancer-specific distress (Impact of Event Scale, IES). Having had contact with a professional psychosocial worker for cancer risk in the past 10 years was significantly associated with higher levels of current cancer specific distress. Only a minority of the counselees reported any adverse effects of genetic counselling on: communication about genetic counselling with their children (9%), family relationships (5%), obtaining life insurance (8%), choice or change of jobs (2%), and obtaining a mortgage (2%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>On average, four years after genetic counselling for HNPCC, only a small minority of counselled individuals reports clinically significant levels of distress, or significant family or social problems.</p

Standard psychological consultations and follow up for women at increased risk of hereditary breast cancer considering prophylactic mastectomy

__Background:__ Women at increased (genetic) risk of breast cancer have to weigh the personal pros and cons of prophylactic mastectomy (PM) as an option to reduce their cancer risk. So far, no routine referral to a psychologist has been investigated for women considering PM. Aim of this study was to asses: 1) the acceptance of the offer of a standard psychological consultation as part of pre-surgical decision-making in high-risk women, 2) reasons for PM and reasons for postponing it, 3) the need for additional psychological interventions, and factors associated, and 4) the frequency of psychiatric/psychological treatment history. __Methods:__ During a 30 months period, women at high risk considering PM were offered a psychological consultation. The content of these, and follow-up, consultations were analyzed. __Results:__ Most women (70 out of 73) accepted the psychological consultation, and 81% proceeded with PM. Main reasons for undergoing PM were to reduce anxiety about cancer, and to reduce the cancer risk. Uncertainty about surgery and the need for further information were the reasons given most frequently for postponing PM. Additional psychological support was given to 31% before and 14% after PM. The uptake of additional support was significantly higher in women with a BRCA1/2 mutation. A history of psychiatric/psychological treatment was present in 36%, mainly consisting of depression and grief after death of a mother. __Conclusion:__ The uptake-rate of the standard psychological consultation indicates a high level of acceptability of this service for women deciding about PM. Since anxiety is one of the main reasons for considering PM, and depression and grief were present in a third, a standard consultation with a psychologist for high-risk women considering PM may be indicated. This may help them arrive at an informed decision, to detect and manage psychological distress, and to plan psychological support services

Behavioral and psychosocial effects of rapid genetic counseling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: Design of a multicenter randomized clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It has been estimated that between 5% and 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have a hereditary form of the disease, primarily caused by a <it>BRCA1 </it>or <it>BRCA2 </it>gene mutation. Such women have an increased risk of developing a new primary breast and/or ovarian tumor, and may therefore opt for preventive surgery (e.g., bilateral mastectomy, oophorectomy). It is common practice to offer high-risk patients genetic counseling and DNA testing after their primary treatment, with genetic test results being available within 4-6 months. However, some non-commercial laboratories can currently generate test results within 3 to 6 weeks, and thus make it possible to provide <it>rapid </it>genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) prior to primary treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of RGCT on treatment decisions and on psychosocial health.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this randomized controlled trial, 255 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with at least a 10% risk of carrying a <it>BRCA </it>gene mutation are being recruited from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either a RGCT intervention group (the offer of RGCT directly following diagnosis with tests results available before surgical treatment) or to a usual care control group. The primary behavioral outcome is the uptake of direct bilateral mastectomy or delayed prophylactic contralateral mastectomy. Psychosocial outcomes include cancer risk perception, cancer-related worry and distress, health-related quality of life, decisional satisfaction and the perceived need for and use of additional decisional counseling and psychosocial support. Data are collected via medical chart audits and self-report questionnaires administered prior to randomization, and at 6 month and at 12 month follow-up.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This trial will provide essential information on the impact of RGCT on the choice of primary surgical treatment among women with breast cancer with an increased risk of hereditary cancer. This study will also provide data on the psychosocial consequences of RGCT and of risk-reducing behavior.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1493) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00783822).</p

Decisional conflict in breast cancer patients considering immediate breast reconstruction

Background: Breast cancer (BC) patients who are treated with mastectomy are frequently offered immediate breast reconstruction. This study aimed to assess decisional conflict in patients considering immediate breast reconstruction, and to identify factors associated with clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC). Methods: Baseline data of a multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of an online decision aid for BC patients considering immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy were analyzed. Participants completed questionnaires assessing sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, decisional conflict and other patient-reported outcomes related to decision-making such as breast reconstruction preference, knowledge, information resources used, preferred involvement in decision-making, information coping style, and anxiety. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with CSDC (score > 37.5 on decisional conflict). Results: Of the 250 participants, 68% experienced CSDC. Patients with a slight preference for breast reconstruction (odds ratio (OR) = 6.19, p < .01), with no preference for or against breast reconstruction (OR = 11.84, p < .01), and with a strong preference for no breast reconstruction (OR = 5.20, p < .05) were more likely to experience CSDC than patients with a strong preference for breast reconstruction. Furthermore, patients with more anxiety were more likely to experience CSDC (OR = 1.03, p = .01). Conclusion: A majority of BC patients who consider immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy experience clinically significant decisional conflict. The findings emphasize the need for decision support, especially for patients who do not have a strong preference for breast reconstruction

Light therapy as a treatment of cancer-related fatigue in (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (SPARKLE trial): study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundCancer related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most prevalent and distressing long-term complaints reported by (non-) Hodgkin survivors. To date there has been no standard treatment for CRF in this population. A novel and promising approach to treat CRF is exposure to bright white light therapy. Yet, large scale randomized controlled trials testing its efficacy in these patients and research on potential mechanisms is lacking. The objective of the current study is to investigate the efficacy of light therapy as a treatment for CRF and to explore potential mechanisms.Methods/designIn a multicenter, randomized controlled trial we are evaluating the efficacy of two intensities of light therapy in reducing CRF complaints and restrictions caused by CRF in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Secondary outcomes include sleep quality, depression, anxiety, quality of life, cognitive complaints, cancer worries, fatigue catastrophizing, self-efficacy to handle fatigue, biological circadian rhythms of melatonin, cortisol and activity, and biomarkers of inflammation. We will recruit 128 survivors, with fatigue complaints, from academic and general hospitals. Survivors are randomized to either an intervention (exposure to bright white light) or a comparison group (exposure to dim white light). The longitudinal design includes four measurement points at baseline (T0), post-intervention at 3.5&nbsp;weeks (T1), 3&nbsp;months post-intervention (T2) and 9&nbsp;months post-intervention (T3). Each measurement point includes self-reported questionnaires and actigraphy (10&nbsp;days). T0 and T1 measurements also include collection of blood and saliva samples.DiscussionLight therapy has the potential to be an effective treatment for CRF in cancer survivors. This study will provide insights on its efficacy and potential mechanisms. If proven to be effective, light therapy will provide an easy to deliver, low-cost and low-burden intervention, introducing a new era in the treatment of CRF.Trial registrationThe study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on August 8th 2017( NCT03242902 )

Does rapid genetic counseling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients cause additional psychosocial distress? Results from a randomized clinical trial

Purpose:Female breast cancer patients carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation have an increased risk of second primary breast cancer. Rapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) before surgery may influence choice of primary surgical treatment. In this article, we report on the psychosocial impact of RGCT.Methods:Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients at risk for carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation were randomized to an intervention group (offer of RGCT) or a usual care control group (ratio 2:1). Psychosocial impact and quality of life were assessed with the Impact of Events Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer Worry Scale, and the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23. Assessments took place at study entry and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits.Results:Between 2008 and 2010, 265 patients were recruited into the study. Completeness of follow-up data was more than 90%. Of the 178 women in the intervention group, 177 had genetic counseling, of whom 71 (40%) had rapid DNA testing and 59 (33%) received test results before surgery. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses showed no statistically significant differences between groups over time in any of the psychosocial outcomes.Conclusions:In this study, RGCT in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients did not have any measurable adverse psychosocial effects