Who Is at Risk for Psychological Distress in Genetic Testing Programs for Hereditary Cancer Disorders?

Presymptomatic identification of disease gene carriers is becoming an increasingly common part of the clinical management of hereditary cancer disorders. With an expected increase in the number of requests for DNA testing and the limited resources for counseling, the amount of time genetic counselors are able to spend with test candidates will decrease. It is therefore important for counselors to identify persons at risk for psychological distress. Based on a review of experiences with Huntington disease and cancer patients, we describe factors likely to evoke distress in genetic cancer candidates. We also discuss the sometimes widely different ways that test candidates and their partners respond to genetic testing. By exploring risk factors for distress in relevant domains of the research, we can offer counselors guidelines for determining who may need extra counseling.     

An Investigation of Genetic Counselors’ Testing Recommendations: Pedigree Analysis and the Use of Multiplex Breast Cancer Panel Testing

Genetic testing recommendations for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer involve pedigree analysis and consultation of testing guidelines. The testing landscape for hereditary cancer syndromes is shifting as multiplex panel tests become more widely integrated into clinical practice. The purpose of the current study was to assess how genetic counselors utilize pedigrees to make recommendations for genetic testing, to determine consistency of these recommendations with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines and to explore current use of multiplex panel testing. Sixty-nine genetic counselors were recruited through the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cancer Special Interest Group’s Discussion Forum. Participation involved pedigree analysis and completion of an online questionnaire assessing testing recommendations and use of multiplex panel testing. Pedigree analysis and test recommendations were scored for consistency with NCCN guidelines. The average score was 12.83/15 indicating strong consistency with NCCN guidelines. Participants were more likely to consider multiplex testing when pedigrees demonstrated highly penetrant dominant inheritance but were not indicative of a particular syndrome. Participant concerns about multiplex panel testing include limited guidelines for both testing eligibility and medical management. This study demonstrates high utilization of pedigree analysis and raises new questions about its use in multiplex genetic testing.     

Why Is Cancer Genetic Counseling Underutilized by Women Identified as at Risk for Hereditary Breast Cancer? Patient Perceptions of Barriers Following a Referral Letter

Family history information comprises an important tool in identifying and referring patients at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) to cancer genetic counseling. Despite recommendations and support provided by numerous professional organizations, cancer genetic counseling services are underutilized by atrisk patients. This study aimed to: (1) determine the rate of genetic counseling utilization following a referral letter, (2) characterize factors (barriers and supports) which influenced uptake of services, and (3) identify potential strategies for increasing utilization. This study evaluated the uptake of cancer genetic counseling among 603 screening mammography patients identified as having an increased risk for HBOC based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines. At risk individuals and their primary care providers were mailed a referral letter recommending genetic counseling. Three focus groups (N = 24) were conducted to identify responses to receiving a letter recommending genetic counseling, barriers to seeking genetic counseling, and facilitating factors to utilizing these services. Participant responses were qualitatively analyzed using thematic and cross case analysis. Within one year, 50/603 (8 %) of the identified at-risk women completed a genetic counseling appointment. Participant-perceived barriers which influenced their decision not to seek genetic counseling included lack of relevance and utility, limited knowledge about genetic counseling, concerns about the genetic counseling process, and concerns about cost and insurance coverage. Participant-perceived facilitating factors which would support a decision to seek genetic counseling included greater awareness and education about genetic counseling services when receiving a referral, and improved follow up and guidance from their provider. Findings from this study support the need for patient and primary care provider education, and improved provider-patient communication to increase uptake of genetic counseling services.     

Clinical Ethics: Theory Or Practice?

This article starts with a brief historical account of the ongoing debate about the status of clinical ethics: theory of practice. The author goes on to argue that clinical ethics is best understood as a practice. However, its practicality should not be measured by the extent to which clinical-ethical consultants manage to mediate or negotiate resolutions to ethical conflicts. Rather, clinical ethics is practical because it is characterized by a profound concern for the well-being of individual patients as well as the moral parameters of swift and urgent medical action in the face of limited supportive information.     

Whose Gene Is It? A Case Discussion About Familial Conflict over Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer

A multidisciplinary group of genetic and other professionals discuss a complex case of familial conflict over access to genetic information. One twin wishes to know the results of her deceased mother's tests for BRCA1 mutations; a second twin objects to researchers making this information available. As the case discussion unfolds, the apparent facts of this case are called into question and the lines of ethical certainty become less clear.     

African American Women’s Limited Knowledge and Experiences with Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast Cancer

Genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast cancer have the potential benefit of early detection and early interventions in African American women. However, African American women have low use of these services compared to White women. We conducted two focus groups with African American women diagnosed with breast cancer (affected group, n?=?13) and women with at least one first-degree relative with breast/ovarian cancer (unaffected group, n?=?8). A content analysis approach was employed to analyze interview data. Breast cancer survivors had more knowledge about genetic counseling and testing than participants who were unaffected with cancer. However, knowledge about genetic counseling was limited in both groups. Barriers to pursuing genetic counseling and testing included poor understanding of the genetic counseling and testing process, fear of carrying the mutation, concerns about discrimination, and cost. Motivators to participate in genetic counseling and testing included desire to help family members, insurance coverage, and potential of benefiting the larger African American community. Education efforts are needed to increase genetic counseling and testing awareness in the African American community.     

Is the Divide a Chasm?: Bridging Affective Science with Clinical Practice

This special section endeavors to facilitate the integration of biologically-based assessments of emotion into the clinical setting. This goal is consistent with the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative, which aims to identify transdiagnostic biobehavioral mechanisms that underlie mental disorders. We focus on four challenges to applying biologically-informed research on emotion and emotion regulation to clinical contexts: (1) How do we assess emotion in an RDoC framework? (2) How do we integrate measures of emotion with other systems in a wider context? (3) What do physiological indices of emotion tell us about clinical phenomena? and (4) How do we integrate physiological assessments into clinical practice? Throughout this comment, we refer to the articles in this special section to make our points, and, when possible, offer suggestions for future work to continue to address these challenges.     

Breast Cancer in Men: Emasculation by Association?

The occurrence of breast cancer in men is rare in comparison to women. Public knowledge that men can get breast cancer and of male breast self-examination are lacking. Research in the course and treatment of breast cancer in men is needed. Men generally present in more advanced stages of breast cancer than women, and have a poorer prognosis. In this article, the epidemiology, common symptoms, diagnostic methods, and current treatment of breast cancer in men are described. Gender differences in presentation and course of illness are discussed. Additionally, the psychological implications of breast cancer for male gender roles and masculine identity are explored. Directions for further investigation are given. Treatment providers are encouraged to educate themselves and their male patients on breast cancer in men and male breast examination techniques so that this disease may be identified earlier in its course and survival rates improved.     

Life Trajectories, Genetic Testing, and Risk Reduction Decisions in 18–39 Year Old Women at Risk for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

This qualitative study identified four life trajectories that influenced the decision in young women to have genetic testing for mutations in BRCA1/2 and subsequent risk reduction decisions after receiving a positive mutation result. Fifty nine women between the ages of 18–39 years were interviewed in this grounded theory study, 44 of those tested were found to have a mutation in either BRCA1 or BRCA2. Of those with a mutation, 23 had no history of cancer and 21 had a breast cancer diagnosis. Analysis of the 44 participants tested found that risk reducing decisions were related to the life trajectories that preceded genetic testing. These life trajectories included: 1) Long-standing awareness of breast cancer in the family, 2) Loss of one’s mother to breast cancer at a young age, 3) Expression of concern by a health care provider, and 4) Personal diagnosis of breast cancer. Understanding possible influences behind decision making for genetic testing and risk reduction in young women may assist health care providers in offering age appropriate guidance and support.     

Phenomenologizing with A Hammer: Theory or Practice?

As a contribution towards clearing the ground for a new phenomenological evaluation of the essence of science, in this paper I present a critique of Heidegger's argument in Being and Time for the priority of Zuhandenheit to Vorhandenheit. I argue that Heidegger's notion of presence-at-hand is incoherent, conflating Husserl and Descartes, and that this general analysis has serious phenomenological flaws. Contrary to Heidegger, I maintain that there is a form of exploratory, theoretical activity including causal inquiry which is prior to the type of practical activity entailed by readiness-to-hand. Consideration of this exploratory activity points us in the direction of an alternate conception of the genesis and essence of theory.     

Clinical Behaviors for Addressing Religious/Spiritual Issues: Do We Practice What We Preach?

To determine if counselors integrate clinical behaviors for addressing religious/spiritual issues in counseling consistent with their ratings of the importance of such behaviors, the authors conducted a national survey of American Counseling Association (ACA) members. Seventy‐eight ACA members rated the importance of and frequency with which they engaged in a set of 30 clinical behaviors that were identified in the existing literature as addressing religious/spiritual issues within counseling. Results indicated possible disparities between importance and frequency ratings. Potential barriers to counselors' utilization of religious and spiritually directed clinical behaviors were identified.     

How Do Geneticists and Genetic Counselors Counsel Women from High-Risk Breast Cancer Families?

This qualitative study asked Australian Genetic Counselors and Clinical Geneticists working in cancer genetics to describe their practice when a woman attends a consultation about her family history and her risk of developing breast cancer. Twenty-nine out of 36 Clinical Geneticists/Genetic Counselors returned the questionnaire (82%). Participants identified the key goals of the consultation as (a) identifying the individual needs and concerns of the woman, (b) providing information on genes and chromosomes, (c) giving an individual risk assessment in the context of supportive interaction, and (d) discussing the pros and cons of genetic testing and putting a surveillance plan into place. Respondents emphasized the dual importance of counseling/support and information provision in this setting, suggesting that one could not be given without the other. Implications for clinical practice are discussed.     

A Survey of Patients’ Experiences with the Cancer Genetic Counseling Process: Recommendations for Cancer Genetics Programs

In order to promote ongoing quality improvement of not only the Penn State Cancer Genetics Program, but also other cancer risk assessment programs throughout the country, we developed, piloted and conducted a survey to explore patient expectations, experiences, and satisfaction with the cancer genetic counseling process. The comprehensive survey was mailed to 340 eligible patients, 156 (45.9%) of whom returned the completed survey within the allotted time. Responses to closed-ended questions were tallied and open-ended questions were content analyzed. Major findings show that: (1) Patients were seeking cancer-related information and support throughout the cancer risk assessment process and were interested in participating in available research studies; (2) The setting in which patients are seen for cancer risk assessment may pose potential emotional ramifications; (3) Misperceptions regarding insurance discrimination and lack of insurance coverage persist; (4) Patients view the genetic counselor as responsible for updating them about new discoveries. Specific recommendations for cancer genetics programs are included.     

Jealousy: Compound emotion or label for a particular situation?

Individuals generally experience several emotions when confronted with an unfaithful mate. Such observations have led some scholars to propose that jealousy is a compound emotion. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the concept of jealousy as a combination of primary emotions is an artifact of the failure to control for the focus of concern. The subjects were 149 undergraduates who read jealousy and nonjealousy scenarios and indicated the emotions they believed the partner of a relationship experienced in response to the actions of the mate. The results indicated that manipulation of the focus of concern was a more parsimonious explanation of the results than the assumption that the subjects were basing their responses upon a subjective experience of a compound emotion.This paper was presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Anaheim, California, August 1983.     

Ethical Issues in Cancer Genetics: 1) Whose Information Is It?

This article presents and discusses four clinical cases that exemplify the complexity of ethical dilemmas concerning the provider's obligation to disclose or withhold genetic information from patients. Case 1: What is the responsibility of the cancer genetics provider to ensure that a positive test results is shared with distant relatives? Case 2: To ensure that results go to at-risk relatives, do we have the right to ignore the wishes of the designated next-of-kin? Case 3: Do we have the right to reveal a familial BRCA1 mutation to a patient's relative, who is at 50% risk? Case 4: Do we have an obligation to reveal that a patient is not a blood relative and therefore, not at risk to have inherited a familial mutation? These cases form the basis for discussing the provider's dual obligations to keeping patient confidentiality and informing patients and families about risk (i.e. duty to warn). We also provide a summary of consensus points and additional discussion questions for each case.