Genetic Counseling for Fragile X Syndrome: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The National Society of Genetic Counselors' (NSGC) recommendations for fragile X syndrome (FXS) genetic counseling are intended to assist health care professionals who provide genetic counseling for individuals and families in whom the diagnosis of FXS is strongly suspected or has been made. The recommendations are the opinions of genetic counselors with expertise in FXS counseling and are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.     

Fabry disease in genetic counseling practice: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide health care professionals with recommendations for genetic counseling and testing of individuals with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of Fabry disease, with a family history of Fabry disease, and those identified as female carriers of Fabry disease. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors, medical geneticists, and other health professionals with expertise in Fabry disease counseling, as well as an individual with Fabry disease who is a founder of a Fabry disease patient advocacy group in the United States. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and they are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English-language articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the genetics of Fabry disease, the indications for genetic testing and interpretation of results, psychosocial considerations, and references for professional and patient resources. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a healthcare provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.     

Essential Elements of Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment, Counseling, and Testing: Updated Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Updated from their original publication in 2004, these cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of counseling at-risk individuals through genetic cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Essential components include the intake, cancer risk assessment, genetic testing for an inherited cancer syndrome, informed consent, disclosure of genetic test results, and psychosocial assessment. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.     

Genetic Evaluation and Counseling of Couples with Recurrent Miscarriage: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for genetic evaluation and counseling of couples with recurrent miscarriage (RM). The recommendations are the opinions of the multidisciplinary Inherited Pregnancy Loss Working Group (IPLWG), with expertise in genetic counseling, medical genetics, maternal fetal medicine, internal medicine, infectious disease, cytogenetics, and coagulation disorders. The IPLWG defines RM as three or more clinically recognized consecutive or non-consecutive pregnancy losses occurring prior to fetal viability (<24 weeks gestation). These recommendations are provided to assist genetic counselors and other health care providers in clinical decision-making, as well as to promote consistency of patient care, guide the allocation of medical resources, and increase awareness of the psychosocial and cultural issues experienced by couples with RM. The IPLWG was convened with support from the March of Dimes Western Washington State Chapter and the University of Washington Division of Medical Genetics. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and are based on clinical experiences, review of pertinent English-language published articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the suspected causes of RM, provides indications for genetic evaluation and testing, addresses psychosocial and cultural considerations, and provides professional and patient resources. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of medical management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a health care provider, familiar with the circumstances of a specific case, should always supersede these recommendations.     

Cystic Fibrosis Prenatal Screening in Genetic Counseling Practice: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

For over a decade, prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been considered a model for the integration of genetic testing into routine medical practice. Data from pilot studies and public policy discourse have led to recommendations by some professional organizations that CF screening should be offered or made available to pregnant women and their partners, and to couples planning a pregnancy. It is crucial that genetic counselors gain thorough understanding of the complexities of CF and the implications of positive test results, so that they may serve as a reliable, educated referral base and resource for health care providers and their patients. While not all pregnant women will be referred for genetic counseling prior to CF carrier testing, genetic counselors often will be asked to counsel clients after they have a positive test result, or who are found to be at increased risk. Genetic counselors can play an important role in providing accurate and current information as well as support for patients informed decisions. These recommendations were created by a multicenter working group of genetic counselors with expertise in CF and are based on personal clinical experience, review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. The recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care providers professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.     

Recommendations from Multi-disciplinary Focus Groups on Cascade Testing and Genetic Counseling for Fragile X-associated Disorders

The purpose of this paper is to report the outcome of a collaborative project between the Fragile X Research and Treatment Center at the Medical Investigation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders (M.I.N.D.) Institute at the University of California at Davis, the National Fragile X Foundation (NFXF), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The objective of this collaboration was to develop and disseminate protocols for genetic counseling and cascade testing for the multiple disorders associated with the fragile X mental retardation 1 (FMR1) mutation. Over the last several years, there has been increasing insight into the phenotypic range associated with both the premutation and the full mutation of the FMR1 gene. To help develop recommendations related to screening for fragile X-associated disorders, four, two day advisory focus group meetings were conducted, each with a different theme. The four themes were: (1) fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS); (2) premature ovarian failure (POF) and reproductive endocrinology; (3) psychiatric, behavioral and psychological issues; and (4) population screening and related ethical issues.     

Risk Assessment and Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial and ethical implications of identifying at-risk individuals for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through cancer risk assessment, with or without genetic susceptibility testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment as well as the professional expertise of genetic counselors with significant experience in education and counseling regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Critical components of the process include the ascertainment of medical and family histories, determination and communication of cancer risk, assessment of risk perception, education regarding the genetics of HBOC, discussion of molecular testing for HBOC if appropriate (including benefits, risks and limitations) and any necessary follow-up. These recommendations do not dictate an exclusive course of management or guarantee a specific outcome. Moreover, they do not replace the professional judgment of a health care provider based on the clinical situation of a client.     

Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of identifying at-risk individuals through cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cancer Genetic Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Key components include the intake (medical and family histories), psychosocial assessment (assessment of risk perception), cancer risk assessment (determination and communication of risk), molecular testing for hereditary cancer syndromes (regulations, informed consent, and counseling process), and follow-up considerations. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.     

Molecular carrier testing for the fragile X syndrome: Issues for genetic counselors

Molecular analysis of the fragile X (FMR-1) gene identifies female fragile X carriers, but appropriate genetic counseling can only be provided if the limitations of the testing methods are understood. Molecular analysis of this gene is achieved with both the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and Southern blot techniques. PCR is faster and can determine the actual number of CGG repeats, which modifies genetic counseling substantially. However, for a sizeable percentage of women, PCR alone is not conclusive, and Southern analysis is necessary to complete the study. While this procedure takes longer, it is usually conclusive. Women who present for genetic counseling and carrier testing in the second trimester of pregnancy need this information quickly, and for them the turn-around time is paramount. It is critical that genetic counselors understand these methods so that they can educate their clients and facilitate appropriate follow-up.     

Fabry Disease Practice Guidelines: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Identification and comprehensive care of individuals who have Fabry disease (FD) requires a multidisciplinary approach inclusive of genetic testing, test interpretation, genetic counseling, long term disease symptom monitoring, treatment recommendations, and coordination of therapy. The purpose of this document is to provide health care professionals with guidelines for testing, care coordination, identification of psychosocial issues, and to facilitate a better understanding of disease treatment expert recommendations for patients with Fabry disease. These recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group of genetic counselors, medical geneticists, and other health professionals with expertise in Fabry disease counseling, as well as representatives/founders of the two United States based Fabry disease patient advocacy groups who are themselves affected by Fabry disease. The recommendations are U.S. Preventive Task Force Class III, and they are based on clinical experience, a review of pertinent English-language articles, and reports of expert committees. This document reviews the genetics of Fabry disease, the indications for genetic testing, interpretation of results, psychosocial considerations, and references to professional and patient resources.     

Advances in research on the fragile X syndrome

Fragile X syndrome is a neurodevelopmental disorder that results from a single gene mutation on the X chromosome. The purpose of this review is to summarize key advances made in understanding the fragile X premutation gene seen in carriers and the full mutation gene seen in persons with the syndrome. DNA testing has replaced cytogenetic testing as the primary method for identification of fragile X, although the efficacy of protein level screening is being explored. The premutation is associated with no effects, although there is evidence of physical effects-primarily premature menopause and mild outward features of the fragile X syndrome-among premutation carriers. There is much controversy regarding premutation effects on psychological development. The few experimental studies carried out to date do not suggest noticeable or significant effects. One challenge in addressing this controversy is the sometimes ambiguous differentiation between premutation and full mutation genes. There is a well-established yet highly variable phenotype of the full mutation. Research from this decade has helped to address specific aspects of this phenotype, including the early course of its development in males, the influence of home and family environments, the nature of social difficulties and autistic features seen in boys and girls with fragile X, and the potential role of hyperarousal or hyper-reactivity. Studies in these areas, and on the role of FMR protein, will contribute towards ongoing advances in our understanding of fragile X syndrome and its mechanisms. The variability in physical, social, and cognitive features, as described in this review, is one that prohibits clear-cut screening guidelines designed to avoid high rates of both false positives and false negatives. Results from recent studies indicate the need to consider behavioral features in selecting candidates for fragile X screening. MRDD Research Reviews 2000;6:96-106.     

Neurofibromatosis Type 1 in Genetic Counseling Practice: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for the genetic counseling of patients and families undergoing evaluation for neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) or who have received a diagnosis of NF1. These recommendations are the opinions of a multi-center working group of genetic counselors with expertise in the care of individuals with NF1. These recommendations are based on the committee’s clinical experiences, a review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. These recommendations are not intended to dictate an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider’s professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of an individual patient. Both Heather B. Radtke and Courtney D. Sebold contributed equally to this document.     

Patient Satisfaction with Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Psychometric Analysis of the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale

Satisfaction is an important patient reported outcome of genetic counseling, as it is one of the elements used by professional organizations and healthcare accrediting bodies to determine the quality of professional work. However, empirical research on patient satisfaction with genetic counseling has been limited, partly due to the lack of standardized measures available to assess this construct. The purpose of this study was to conduct a psychometric analysis of a new satisfaction measure, the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale (GCSS), within a sample of women participating in a no-cost cancer genetic counseling and testing program. The sample consisted of 61 women undergoing counseling and testing for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer risk (BRCA1/2 testing) who completed the GCSS following pretest counseling. The results suggest that the GCSS was reliable (Cronbach's coefficient alpha = 0.90) and that participants were highly satisfied with the care they received. In addition, there were no differences in satisfaction between cancer genetic counseling and prenatal counseling participants (based on preexisting norms), and satisfaction did not vary by sociodemographic characteristics. Implications and recommendations are discussed.     

Attitude of Medical School Students in China Towards Genetic Testing and Counseling Issues in FXS

Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common form of inherited intellectual disability. However, genetic testing protocols and genetic counseling guidelines for FXS are not yet established in mainland China. In the present study, we conducted a comprehensive analysis using a self-administered questionnaire among students at the Xiangya medical school to investigate their attitude towards genetic testing and counseling issues of FXS. We have gained a general understanding of the attitudes of medical students towards these FXS issues in China. This information is of immense importance to develop appropriate genetic tests and to train counselors for FXS. As the medical school students surveyed are prospective physicians who will be a part of the Chinese health system, our survey was focused on the basic knowledge of FXS, population-based FXS screening, confidentiality and reproductive options for mutation carriers. The study demonstrated that only less than one third of the participants had heard about FXS. 94.6 % of participants were in favor of FXS screening for women in their reproductive age who had a genetic history of FXS. Furthermore, only half of the participants would inform their families about their genetic status in case of positive test results, and more than half of the participants supported natural conception and prenatal diagnosis for FXS mutation carriers. Additional findings and research implications are also discussed. This survey targeting potential doctors provides important information for the development of FXS genetic test and counselor training for the Chinese health system.     

Genetic Counseling and Screening of Consanguineous Couples and Their Offspring: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for genetic counseling and screening for consanguineous couples (related as second cousins or closer) and their offspring with the goals of1. providing preconception reproductive options2. improving pregnancy outcome and identifying reproductive choices3. reducing morbidity and mortality in the 1st years of life, and4. respecting psychosocial and multicultural issues.The recommendations are the opinions of a multicenter working group (the Consanguinity Working Group (CWG)) with expertise in genetic counseling, medical genetics, biochemical genetics, genetic epidemiology, pediatrics, perinatology, and public health genetics, which was convened by the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC). The consensus of the CWG and NSGC reviewers is that beyond a thorough medical family history with follow-up of significant findings, no additional preconception screening is recommended for consanguineous couples. Consanguineous couples should be offered similar genetic screening as suggested for any couple of their ethnic group. During pregnancy, consanguineous couples should be offered maternal–fetal serum marker screening and high-resolution fetal ultrasonography. Newborns should be screened for impaired hearing and detection of treatable inborn errors of metabolism. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. The professional judgment of a health care provider, familiar with the facts and circumstances of a specific case, will always supersede these recommendations.     

Uptake of BRCA1 Genetic Testing in Adult Sisters and Daughters of Known Mutation Carriers in Norway

This study was undertaken to examine transmission of information to first-degree relatives of BRCA1 mutation carriers and uptake of genetic testing. The intention was to consider revision of current legislation related to privacy if information on life-saving health care was not disseminated to at-risk family members. The Norwegian Radium Hospital provides clinical genetics services for families at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Together with major hospitals nationwide we provide medical surveillance. Nearly all expenses are covered by the National Health insurance. Because of the high number of families with founder mutations in BRCA1, we are in a unique position to gather information about these groups. Within a consecutive series, we identified 75 BRCA1 mutation carriers and registered information transmission and uptake of genetic testing 6 months or more after the index mutation carriers had been informed about their mutation status. These 75 BRCA1 mutation carriers had 172 living first-degree relatives, aged 18 years or older (84 females, 88 males). Forty-four out of 54 (81.5%) of females over 30 had opted for genetic testing. The testing rate among all relatives was 43%. At any age, 63% of the females underwent genetic testing compared with 24% of the males (p<0.05). The overwhelming majority of adult females at risk opted for genetic testing. Males with daughters more frequently than males without daughters asked for testing. The findings give neither reason to reconsider legislation on privacy, nor for us to consider more aggressive methods of contacting relatives.     

Acceptance of Genetic Counseling and Testing in a Hospital-Based Series of Patients with Gynecological Cancer

Referral of patients with endometrial (EC) and/or ovarian cancer (OC) for genetic counseling is based on age at diagnosis and family history. Many patients with hereditary cancers are missed by following this strategy. We determined acceptance and mutation detection rate of offering genetic counseling and testing to unselected EC and OC patients. Therefore, in 2007, EC and OC patients were invited for genetic counseling and testing. Patients were asked for their reasons to accept or decline. Nineteen out of fifty-two EC patients (36 %) and twenty-two out of thirty-five OC patients (63 %) accepted genetic counseling, mainly to receive risk assessment for themselves and relatives. Counseling was declined mainly because patients did not want more tests or had no relatives for whom it was relevant. Eighteen out of nineteen EC patients (95 %) and twenty out of twenty-two OC patients (91 %) underwent genetic testing. One EC patient carried an MSH6 mutation (mutation detection rate: 6 %). BRCA1/2 mutations were found in two out of twenty OC patients (10 %). Eleven patients (29 %) received surveillance recommendations for themselves and their relatives. Finally, family history recorded by the gynecologist was compared to that taken by the clinical geneticist. Gynecologists reported family history in ten out of forty-one participants (24 %). In conclusion, genetic counseling and testing are acceptable to patients with OC and/or EC. The 10 % BRCA1/2 mutation detection rate and underreporting of family history by gynecologists warrant referral for genetic counseling for all OC patients, followed by BRCA1/2 testing if indicated. We recommend that microsatellite instability and immunohistochemical analysis be performed in all EC patients, followed by genetic counseling if appropriate. These strategies will lead to better cancer prevention in gynecological cancer patients and their relatives.     

Risk Reduction Behaviors and Provider Communication Following Genetic Counseling and BRCA1 Mutation Testing in an African American Kindred

Little is known about the impact of cancer genetic counseling and testing on health behaviors in racial and ethnic subgroups. This prospective observational study examined use of risk reduction strategies following BRCA1 counseling and testing. Participants were female members of an African American kindred who received genetic education, counseling and testing (n = 40) and completed a 1-year follow-up interview. Mutation carriers were more likely to opt for breast (100%, 7/7) and ovarian (25%; 1 of 4) cancer surveillance than prophylactic surgery. Following genetic counseling, 71% (5/7) of the BRCA1 carriers who opted for surveillance reported having a mammogram within the year following receipt of their genetic test results. Ovarian cancer screening among mutation carriers increased from 0% at baseline to 25% (one of four) at 1 year. Compared to noncarriers (23%, 7/30), carriers (70%, 7/10) were more likely to discuss their BRCA1 test results with their primary health care providers. Surveillance for breast cancer was preferred to prophylactic surgery and chemoprevention as a way to reduce risk for these cancers. Our data indicate that patient-provider communication about BRCA1 test results is suboptimal.     

BRCA1 Testing: Genetic Counseling Protocol Development and Counseling Issues

This article discusses the genetic counseling protocols which were developed and counseling issues that have arisen in the first 2 years of evaluating a large kindred with a BRCA1 mutation. The rationale for the development of the genetic counseling protocols and specific genetic counseling visual aids are presented and discussed. The protocols and counseling aids can serve as models for other programs offering cancer susceptibility testing. The observations of study counselors about study subject concerns and responses to genetic testing at the time of the pretest and posttest counseling sessions are presented.