Patients’ Perceptions and Experiences of Familial Hypercholesterolemia, Cascade Genetic Screening and Treatment

Background: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a serious genetic disorder affecting approximately 1 in every 300 to 500 individuals and is characterised by excessively high low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels, substantially increased risk of early-onset coronary heart disease (CHD) and premature mortality. If FH is untreated, it leads to a greater than 50 % risk of CHD in men by the age of 50 and at least 30 % in women by the age of 60. FH can be diagnosed through genetic screening and effectively managed through pharmacological treatment and lifestyle changes. Purpose: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic health condition that increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Although FH can be effectively managed with appropriate pharmacological and dietary interventions, FH detection rate through genetic screening remains low. The present study explored perceptions and experiences of FH patients (N = 18) involved in a genetic cascade screening programme. Methods: Face-to-face interviews were conducted to assess patients’ knowledge and understanding of FH, explore factors linked to adherence to health-protective behaviours and examine perceptions of genetic screening. Results: Thematic analysis of interviews revealed four themes: disease knowledge, severity of FH, lifestyle behavioural change and barriers to cascade screening and treatment. Participants recognised FH as a permanent, genetic condition that increased their risk of CHD and premature mortality. Many participants dismissed the seriousness of FH and the importance of lifestyle changes because they perceived it to be effectively managed through medication. Despite positive attitudes toward screening, many participants reported that relatives were reluctant to attend screening due to their relatives’ ‘fatalistic’ outlook or low motivation. Participants believed that they had insufficient authority or control to persuade family members to attend screening and welcomed greater hospital assistance for contact with relatives. Conclusions: Findings support the adoption of direct methods of recruitment to cascade screening led by medical professionals, who were perceived as having greater authority. Other implications included the need for clinicians to provide clear information, particularly to those who are asymptomatic, related to the seriousness of FH and the necessity for adherence to medication and lifestyle changes

Cascade testing in Familial Hypercholesterolaemia: how should family members be contacted?

Cascade testing or screening provides an important mechanism for identifying people at risk of a genetic condition. For some autosomal dominant conditions, such as Familial Hpercholesterolaemia (FH), identifying relatives allows for significant health-affecting interventions to be administered, which can extend a person’s life expectancy significantly. However, cascade screening is not without ethical implications. In this paper, we examine one ethically contentious aspect of cascade screening programmes, namely the alternative methods by which relatives of a proband can be contacted. Should the proband be responsible for contacting his or her family members, or should the screening programme contact family members directly? We argue that direct contact is an ethically justifiable method of contact tracing in cascade screening for FH. Not only has this method of contact already been utilised without adverse effects, an examination of the ethical arguments against it shows these are unsubstantiated. We describe several criteria which, if met, will allow an appropriate balance to be struck between maximising the efficiency of family tracing and respecting the interests of probands and their relatives. Keywords Cascade genetic screening; cascade testing; confidentiality; autonomy; genetics; ethics; guidelines; familial hypercholesterolaemi

Is the process of delivery of an individually tailored lifestyle intervention associated with improvements in LDL cholesterol and multiple lifestyle behaviours in people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>More insight in the association between reach, dose and fidelity of intervention components and effects is needed. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate reach, dose and fidelity of an individually tailored lifestyle intervention in people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) and the association between intervention dose and changes in LDL-Cholesterol (LDL-C), and multiple lifestyle behaviours at 12-months follow-up.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants (n = 181) randomly allocated to the intervention group received the PRO-FIT intervention consisting of computer-tailored lifestyle advice (<it>PRO-FIT*advice</it>) and counselling (face-to-face and telephone booster calls) using Motivational Interviewing (MI). According to a process evaluation plan, intervention reach, dose delivered and received, and MI fidelity were assessed using the recruitment database, website/counselling logs and the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI 3.1.1.) code. Regression analyses were conducted to explore differences between participant and non-participant characteristics, and the association between intervention dose and change in LDL-C, and multiple lifestyle behaviours.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A 34% (n = 181) representative proportion of the intended intervention group was reached during the recruitment phase; participants did not differ from non-participants (n = 623) on age, gender and LDL-C levels. Of the participants, 95% received a <it>PRO-FIT*advice</it> log on account, of which 49% actually logged on and completed at least one advice module. Nearly all participants received a face-to-face counselling session and on average, 4.2 telephone booster calls were delivered. None of the face-to-face sessions were implemented according to MI guidelines. Overall, weak non-significant positive associations were found between intervention dose and LDL-C and lifestyle behaviours.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Implementation of the PRO-FIT intervention in practice appears feasible, particularly <it>PRO-FIT*advice</it>, since it can be relative easily implemented with a high dose delivered. However, only less than half of the intervention group received the complete intervention-package as intended. Strategies to let participants optimally engage in using web-based computer-tailored interventions like <it>PRO-FIT*advice</it> are needed. Further, more emphasis should be put on more extensive MI training and monitoring/supervision.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR1899 at ww.trialregister.nl.</p

Dragerschapscreening: gericht op risicogroepen of populatiebreed?: Verslag van een stakeholdermeeting POM project

Op 29 januari 2016 is ten behoeve van het ZonMw POM project (Preconceptioneel dragerschaponderzoek Op Maat) een stakeholdermeeting gehouden om de (toekomstige) implementatie van dragerschapscreening te bespreken. Het doel van de bijeenkomst was de aanknopingspunten en uitdagingen voor een verantwoorde introductie van dragerschapscreening in Nederland in kaart te brengen. Tijdens de bijeenkomst zijn de resultaten uit eerdere onderdelen van het project gepresenteerd, is met verschillende betrokken stakeholders gezocht naar mogelijke oplossingen voor (potentiële) problemen bij de huidige implementatie van screening, met name gericht op specifieke risicogroepen, en zijn mogelijkheden van een (toekomstig) aanbod van screening op meerdere aandoeningen in de algemene bevolking verkend. Dit verslag geeft een samenvatting van de gehouden voordrachten en van de gevoerde discussie

Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic strategies for population screening in hemochromatosis: Assessment of anxiety, depression, and perception of health

Purpose: Hemochromatosis is a treatable disorder with a major genetic predisposition. It provides an example in which genotypic and phenotypic strategies for screening may be compared. We previously showed noninferiority of uptake of a genotypic population screening strategy for hemochromatosis compared with a phenotypic strategy. In this article we present the psychologic effects of each strategy.Methods: A sample of 3000 individuals from primary care were randomly allocated to a phenotypic or genotypic screening strategy for hemochromatosis, and the 939 individuals who accepted screening provide the sample for this article. Standardized assessments of anxiety, general health, and depression were made at invitation, testing, result-giving, and 6 months.Results: Screening did not lead to significant changes in the self-rated assessments of anxiety, depression, and general health over time, and there were no significant differences between the two screening strategies. The unemployed or permanently disabled had lower ratings of health and higher anxiety and depression.Conclusion: The two screening strategies appeared to cause little adverse psychologic disturbance in the short term, and there was no difference between the two strategies This study provides some empiric data to support arguments against "genetic exceptionalism" and suggests that genetic testing when used for population screening for a treatable disease has few adverse effects.<br/