Counsellee’s experience of cancer genetic counselling with pedigrees that automatically incorporate genealogical and cancer database information

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked Files. This article is open access.While pedigree drawing software is often utilised in genetic services, the use of genealogical databases in genetic counselling is unusual. This is mainly because of the unavailability of such databases in most countries. Electronically generated pedigrees used for cancer genetic counselling in Iceland create pedigrees that automatically incorporate information from a large, comprehensive genealogy database and nation-wide cancer registry. The aim of this descriptive qualitative study was to explore counsellees' experiences of genetic services, including family history taking, using these electronically generated pedigrees. Four online focus groups with 19 participants were formed, using an asynchronous posting method. Participants were encouraged to discuss their responses to questions posted on the website by the researcher. The main themes arising were motivation, information and trust, impact of testing and emotional responses. Most of the participants expressed trust in the method of using electronically generated pedigrees, although some voiced worries about information safety. Many experienced worry and anxiety while waiting for results of genetic testing, but limited survival guilt was noted. Family communication was either unchanged or improved following genetic counselling. The use of electronically generated pedigrees was well received by participants, and they trusted the information obtained via the databases. Age did not seem to influence responses. These results may be indicative of the particular culture in Iceland, where genealogical information is well known and freely shared. Further studies are needed to determine whether use of similar approaches to genealogical information gathering may be acceptable elsewhere

Men's values-based factors on prostate cancer risk genetic testing: A telephone survey

BACKGROUND: While a definitive genetic test for Hereditary Prostate Cancer (HPC) is not yet available, future HPC risk testing may become available. Past survey data have shown high interest in HPC testing, but without an in-depth analysis of its underlying rationale to those considering it. METHODS: Telephone computer-assisted interviews of 400 men were conducted in a large metropolitan East-coast city, with subsequent development of psychometric scales and their correlation with intention to receive testing. RESULTS: Approximately 82% of men interviewed expressed that they "probably" or "definitely" would get genetic testing for prostate cancer risk if offered now. Factor analysis revealed four distinct, meaningful factors for intention to receive genetic testing for prostate cancer risk. These factors reflected attitudes toward testing and were labeled "motivation to get testing," "consequences and actions after knowing the test result," "psychological distress," and "beliefs of favorable outcomes if tested" (α = 0.89, 0.73, 0.73, and 0.60, respectively). These factors accounted for 70% of the total variability. The domains of motivation (directly), consequences (inversely), distress (inversely), and positive expectations (directly) all correlated with intention to receive genetic testing (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Men have strong attitudes favoring genetic testing for prostate cancer risk. The factors most associated with testing intention include those noted in past cancer genetics studies, and also highlights the relevance in considering one's motivation and perception of positive outcomes in genetic decision-making

The withdrawal from oncogenetic counselling and testing for hereditary and familial breast and ovarian cancer. A descriptive study of an Italian sample

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Oncogenetic counselling is seldom followed through, even when individuals are eligible according to the test criteria. The basic variables which influence the decision to undergo the genetic counselling process are: risk perception, expected benefit or limitations of genetic testing, general psychological distress or cancer-specific distress, lack of trust in one's emotional reactions when faced with negative events, expected level of family support and communications within the family. The aim of this study was to describe the psychosocial variables of an Italian sample that forgoes genetic counselling.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>From May 2002 to December 2006 a psychological questionnaire was sent out to one hundred and six subjects, who freely requested a first genetic informative consultation, and never asked to have a second visit and the family tree drawn up in order to inquire about their eligibility for genetic testing. Statistical analysis was performed by Pearson chi-square test, t-test and Spearman RHO coefficient.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The survey presents a lack of emotional cohesion and structured roles and rules within the family system and a positive correlation between the number of children, anxiety and risk perception. The main reasons for giving up on counselling were a sense that testing was a waste of time and the inability to emotionally handle the negative consequences of the test outcome. The subjects who maintained that test and an early diagnosis were a "waste of time" experienced more anxiety.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The study revealed the importance to ac knowledging the whole persona and their family system as well as provide information highlighting usefulness of early diagnosis.</p

Determinants of participation in colonoscopic screening by siblings of colorectal cancer patients in France

International audienceBACKGROUND: Targeted colonosocopic screening is recommended for first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients diagnosed before the age of 60 and offers the possibility of reducing morbidity and mortality, but participation remains too low. The objective of this study was to determine in a French population the factors that affect siblings' participation in screening, notably those relating to the individuals, their medical care, their family and their social network. METHODS: A cross sectional survey was conducted in siblings of index patients having undergone surgery for colorectal cancer between 1999 and 2002 in two French counties. Siblings were contacted during 2007 and 2008 through the index patient. The factors affecting participation in colonoscopic screening were studied by logistic regression taking into account family cluster effect. RESULTS: 172 siblings of 74 index cases were included. The declared rate of undergoing at least one colonoscopy among siblings was 66%; 95%CI 59-73%. Five variables were independently associated with colonoscopic screening: perceiving fewer barriers to screening (OR = 3.2; 95%CI 1.2-8.5), having received the recommendation to undergo screening from a physician (OR = 4.9; 1.7-13.7), perceiving centres practising colonoscopy as more accessible (OR = 3.2, 1.3-7.8), having discussed screening with all siblings (OR = 3.9; 1.6-9.6) and being a member of an association (OR = 2.6; 1.0-6.6). CONCLUSIONS: The factors independently associated with participation in CRC screening by an individual at increased risk belonged to each of four dimensions relating to his individual psychosocial characteristics, to his relationship with a physician, within the family and social environment. The relevance of these results to clinical practice may help to improve compliance to recommendations in a global preventive strategy including all stages of the information pathway from the physician to the index patient and his relatives

Risk perception among Brazilian individuals with high risk for colorectal cancer and colonoscopy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Risk perception is considered a motivating factor for adopting preventive behaviors. This study aimed to verify the demographic characteristics and cancer family history that are predictors of risk perception and to verify if risk perception is a predictor of colonoscopy adherence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Individuals with a family colorectal cancer history as indicated by a proband with cancer were interviewed by telephone. They responded to a questionnaire covering demographic characteristics, colonoscopy history and four questions on risk perception. Tests of multiple linear regression and logistic regression were used to identify associations between dependent and independent variables.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The 117 participants belonged to 62 families and had a mean age of 45.2 years. The majority of these individuals were female (74.4%) and from families who met the Amsterdam Criteria (54.7%). The average risk perception was 47.6%, with a median of 50%. The average population perception of individual risk was 55.4%, with a median of 50%. Variables associated with a higher risk perception were age, gender, religion, school level, income, and death of a family member. The variable predicting colonoscopy was receiving medical information regarding risk (odds ratio OR 8.40).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We found that family cancer history characteristics (number of relatives with cancer, risk classification) are associated with adequate risk perception. Risk perception does not predict colonoscopy in this sample. The only variable that predicted colonoscopy was receiving medical information recommending screening.</p

Risk perception after genetic counseling in patients with increased risk of cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Counselees are more aware of genetics and seek information, reassurance, screening and genetic testing. Risk counseling is a key component of genetic counseling process helping patients to achieve a realistic view for their own personal risk and therefore adapt to the medical, psychological and familial implications of disease and to encourage the patient to make informed choices <abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr><abbr bid="B2">2</abbr></abbrgrp>.</p> <p>The aim of this study was to conceptualize risk perception and anxiety about cancer in individuals attending to genetic counseling.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The questionnaire study measured risk perception and anxiety about cancer at three time points: before and one week after initial genetic counseling and one year after completed genetic investigations. Eligibility criteria were designed to include only index patients without a previous genetic consultation in the family. A total of 215 individuals were included. Data was collected during three years period.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Before genetic counseling all of the unaffected participants subjectively estimated their risk as higher than their objective risk. Participants with a similar risk as the population overestimated their risk most. All risk groups estimated the risk for children's/siblings to be lower than their own. The benefits of preventive surveillance program were well understood among unaffected participants.</p> <p>The difference in subjective risk perception before and directly after genetic counseling was statistically significantly lower in all risk groups. Difference in risk perception for children as well as for population was also statistically significant. Experienced anxiety about developing cancer in the unaffected subjects was lower after genetic counseling compared to baseline in all groups. Anxiety about cancer had clear correlation to perceived risk of cancer before and one year after genetic investigations.</p> <p>The affected participants overestimated their children's risk as well as risk for anyone in population. Difference in risk perception for children/siblings as for the general population was significant between the first and second measurement time points. Anxiety about developing cancer again among affected participants continued to be high throughout this investigation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The participant's accuracy in risk perception was poor, especially in low risk individuals before genetic counseling. There was a general trend towards more accurate estimation in all risk groups after genetic counseling. The importance of preventive programs was well understood. Cancer anxiety was prevalent and associated with risk perception, but decreased after genetic counseling.</p> <p><abbrgrp><abbr bid="B1">1</abbr></abbrgrp> National Society of Genetic Counselors (2005), Genetic Counseling as a Profession. Available at <url>http://www.nsgc.org/about/definition.cfm</url> (accessed November 25th 2007)</p> <p><abbrgrp><abbr bid="B2">2</abbr></abbrgrp> Julian-Reynier C., Welkenhuysen M-, Hagoel L., Decruyenaere M., Hopwood P. (2003) Risk communication strategies: state of the art and effectiveness in the context of cancer genetic services. Eur J of Human Genetics 11, 725736.</p

Factors associated with intentions to adhere to colorectal cancer screening follow-up exams

BACKGROUND: To increase adherence rate to recommendations for follow-up after abnormal colorectal cancer (CRC) screening results, factors that inhibit and facilitate follow-up must be identified. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors associated with intention to adhere to CRC screening follow-up exams. METHODS: During a 4-week period in October 2003, this survey was conducted with 426 subjects participating in a community-based CRC screening program in Nagano, Japan. Study measures included intention to adhere to recommendation for clinical follow-up in the event of an abnormal fecal occult blood test (FOBT) result, perceived susceptibility and severity of CRC, perceived benefits and barriers related to undergoing follow-up examination, social support, knowledge of CRC risk factors, health status, previous CRC screening, personality and social demographic characteristics. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses on intention to adhere to recommendations for follow-up were performed. RESULTS: Among the 288 individuals analyzed, approximately 74.7% indicated that they would definitely adhere to recommendations for follow-up. After controlling for age, gender, marital status, education, economic status, trait anxiety, bowel symptoms, family history of CRC, and previous screening FOBT, analyses revealed that lower levels of perceived barriers, higher levers of perceived benefits and knowledge of CRC risk factors were significantly associated with high intention respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that future interventions should focus on reducing modifiable barriers by clarifying misperceptions about follow-up, promoting the acceptance of complete diagnostic evaluations, addressing psychological distress, and making follow-up testing more convenient and accessible. Moreover, educating the public regarding the risk factors of CRC and increasing understanding of the benefits of follow-up is also important