Interest and Beliefs About BRCA Genetic Counseling Among At-Risk Latinas in New York City

Background: Latinas are less likely to use genetic services (counseling and testing) for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer risk compared to other ethnic groups. Meanwhile, little is known about barriers to genetic counseling among Latinas at increased risk of inherited breast cancer. Methods: A two-phase pilot study was conducted to examine interest, barriers and beliefs about BRCA genetic counseling among at-risk Latinas in New York City and explore the potential for developing a culturally-tailored narrative educational tool for use in future studies. Phase 1 included quantitative telephone interviews (N = 15) with bilingual participants with a personal diagnosis at a young age and/or family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer. Quantitative results informed development of a narrative prototype educational presentation viewed by a subset of participants (N = 10) in Phase 2 focus groups. Results: Despite barriers, including lack of awareness/knowledge, concerns related to learning cancer risks of family members, and concerns about cost/health insurance, participants reported positive attitudes, beliefs and interest in learning about BRCA genetic counseling. Further, significant increases in knowledge were demonstrated from pre-post presentation (p = 0.04). Conclusion: There is an unmet need to educate at-risk Latinas about BRCA genetic counseling. Culturally-tailored educational materials including narratives may increase knowledge about BRCA genetic counseling among this underserved group. The effectiveness of these approaches should be tested in future research with larger samples.     

Bias in the Reporting of Family History: Implications for Clinical Care

Family history of cancer is critical for identifying and managing patients at risk for cancer. However, the quality of family history data is dependent on the accuracy of patient self reporting. Therefore, the validity of family history reporting is crucial to the quality of clinical care. A retrospective review of family history data collected at a community hospital between 2005 and 2009 was performed in 43,257 women presenting for screening mammography. Reported numbers of breast, colon, prostate, lung, and ovarian cancer were compared in maternal relatives vs. paternal relatives and in first vs. second degree relatives. Significant reporting differences were found between maternal and paternal family history of cancer, in addition to degree of relative. The number of paternal family histories of cancer was significantly lower than that of maternal family histories of cancer. Similarly, the percentage of grandparents' family histories of cancer was significantly lower than the percentage of parents' family histories of cancer. This trend was found in all cancers except prostate cancer. Self-reported family history in the community setting is often influenced by both bloodline of the cancer history and the degree of relative affected. This is evident by the underreporting of paternal family histories of cancer, and also, though to a lesser extent, by degree. These discrepancies in reporting family history of cancer imply we need to take more care in collecting accurate family histories and also in the clinical management of individuals in relation to hereditary risk.     

The Use of Family History Questionnaires: An Examination of Genetic Risk Estimates and Genetic Testing Eligibility in the Non-responder Population

The use of mailed family history questionnaires (FHQs) has previously been established to be an effective method for obtaining family history information for the triage of patients for genetic counseling and genetic testing of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome; yet only 53% of patients complete their FHQ within 6 months from the date of mailing (Armel et al. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18(4):366–378, 2009). Although literature exists evaluating why women may not attend genetic counseling, no data are currently available examining genetic risk or genetic testing eligibility in the population of patients not returning their FHQ (non-responders). Concern exists that if non-responders are not followed-up for the purpose of triage for genetic counseling, individuals at high-risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome may be missed. This article explores the demographics of the non-responder population to assess genetic risk estimates for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and genetic testing eligibility as compared to a responder population of patients who completed a mailed FHQ. A total of 430 pedigrees were obtained, 215 from non-responders and 215 from responders. Results of this study indicate that 69% of non-responders were either unreachable by telephone (42%), declined an appointment (19%), or were previously seen in another center for a genetic counseling visit (8%). Additionally, results indicate that non-responders are less likely to be eligible for genetic testing (40%) as compared to responders (57%) (p = 0.0004). Together these data shed light on a population of patients for which limited information exists and suggest that we question how and to what extent clinics should pursue non-responders, particularly in light of global reductions in health care funding.     

Evaluation of Breast Cancer Patients with Genetic Risk in a University Hospital: Before and After the Implementation of a Heredofamilial Cancer Unit

The identification of patients at risk for breast cancer by genetic testing has proven to reduce breast cancer mortality. In 2010, due to a lack of systematization in hereditary cancer assistance in our center, we implemented a multidisciplinary Heredofamilial Cancer Unit (HFCU). We analyze if the HFCU improved the rates of referrals and preventive management of breast cancer patients with genetic risk. We retrospectively compared family history records, referrals of high-risk patients to genetic counseling, and detection and management of patients with BRCA1/2 mutations in two cohorts of breast cancer patients diagnosed before (first period: 2007–2010) and after the creation of the HFCU (second period: 2010–2013). In the first period, 893 patients were included, and 902 were included in the second. Due to the inability to establish their genetic risk, 142 patients (15.9%) vs. 70 (7.8%) were excluded from analysis (p?<?0.001). Among the evaluable patients, 194 (25.8%) vs. 223 (26.8%) fulfilled one or more risk criteria (p?=?0.65). Family history documentation in patient’s medical records (92.4 vs. 97.8%, p?<?0.001) and referral rate (26.3 vs. 52%, p?<?0.0001) significantly increased in the second period. Eight BRCA1/2 mutations were detected among patients referred in the first period and 17 among those referred to the HFCU. The rate of preventive surgeries in patients with BRCA mutations significantly increased in the second period (25 vs. 76.5%, p?=?0.03). In conclusion, there was a clear improvement in family history records, referrals, and preventive surgeries in breast cancer patients with genetic risk after the implementation of the HFCU.     

Family History of Pancreatic Cancer in a High-Risk Cancer Clinic: Implications for Risk Assessment

Detailed family history is a critical element of cancer risk assessment. The relative importance of pancreatic cancer (PC) in a close family member, particularly in hereditary breast-ovarian syndrome (HBOS), is not clearly defined. We use a case-control design to investigate the importance of a family history of PC to cancer risk assessment. Case and control families were identified from the University of Chicago Cancer Risk database (1994–2005). Pedigrees were analyzed for personal and familial clinical cancer data. Cases included all new subjects (probands) reporting a close relative (first or second degree) with PC. Controls included the probands enrolled in the database immediately prior to and subsequent to each case (i.e. two controls for each case). From 1,231 pedigrees, 103 PC were reported by the proband in 87 unique families. Many probands reported multiple or early-onset PCs: one third (28/87) of case families met criteria for a familial PC syndrome [≥2 first-degree relatives with PC (n = 10) or PC diagnosed ≤50 (n = 18)]. Of these families, the majority (75%) concurrently met criteria suggestive of hereditary breast-ovarian syndrome (HBOS). Because of a family history consistent with HBOS, at least one individual from each of 29 case and 55 control families underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2. Among case families, 19 of 29 (66%) had a BRCA1/2 mutation compared with 16 of 55 (29%) controls. A significant association between family history of PC and a BRCA1/2 mutation was seen (OR 3.78, 1.32–10.9). This point estimate was strengthened but less precise in the non-Ashkenazi Jewish subset of tested families (OR 6.03, 1.68–22.14). In a high-risk population, a family history of PC, though infrequently reported, is nonetheless clinically meaningful. In risk assessment for HBOS, identifying a family history of PC should strongly raise the suspicion of an unrecognized BRCA1/2 mutation.     

Awareness,Perceptions, and Provider Recommendation Related to Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer Risk among At-Risk Hispanic Women: Similarities and Variations by Sub-Ethnicity

This study explored awareness of risk factors for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), awareness, knowledge and concerns about genetic testing, and preference for how to have genetic testing recommended by a care provider among at-risk Hispanic women. Differences in these factors among Mexican, Cuban, and Puerto Rican women were also examined. Women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer from the Tampa Bay Area participated in a qualitative interview (N = 53). Data were analyzed using a combination of open and axial coding with a grounded theory approach. Study participants in all groups reported: being aware that family history was a breast cancer risk factor, limited knowledge of genetic testing, fear of test results, concerns about children’s risks, and no physician referral for genetic testing. Noteworthy sub-ethnic differences included preferences for physician recommendation and information about genetic testing. This study provides important preliminary information about areas related to HBOC that require additional education in the Hispanic community as a whole and by sub-ethnicity.     

Using a Family History Intervention to Improve Cancer Risk Perception in a Black Community

Few studies examine the use of family history to influence risk perceptions in the African American population. This study examined the influence of a family health history (FHH) intervention on risk perceptions for breast (BRCA), colon (CRC), and prostate cancers (PRCA) among African Americans in Pittsburgh, PA. Participants (n = 665) completed pre- and post-surveys and FHHs. We compared their objective and perceived risks, classified as average, moderate, or high, and examined the accuracy of risk perceptions before and after the FHH intervention. The majority of participants had accurate risk perceptions post-FHH. Of those participants who were inaccurate pre-FHH, 43.3%, 43.8%, and 34.5% for BRCA, CRC, and PRCA, respectively, adopted accurate risk perceptions post-FHH intervention. The intervention was successful in a community setting. It has the potential to lead to healthy behavior modifications because participants adopted accurate risk perceptions. We identified a substantial number of at-risk individuals who could benefit from targeted prevention strategies, thus decreasing racial/ethnic cancer disparities.     

Reading Between the Lines: A Comparison of Responders and Non-responders to a Family History Questionnaire and Implications for Cancer Genetic Counselling

Family history questionnaires (FHQ) are useful tools for cancer genetic counseling, providing an informational basis for pedigree construction and individualized cancer risk assessment. Reported return rates of mailed FHQs amongst familial cancer clinics that utilize them are lower than desired however, and it is unknown whether patients perceive required completion of a FHQ as a barrier to access of cancer genetics services. This study critically evaluated the use of a mailed FHQ for all routine new patient referrals to a single hereditary cancer clinic in Quebec, Canada. Reasons for response/non-response to a FHQ and the effect of administration of a questionnaire on patients’ self-reported level of motivation to pursue genetic counseling, were examined. Of 112 eligible individuals referred during the study period, 86 completed a semi-structured telephone survey; of these, 45% had returned the mailed FHQ prior to the telephone survey (Responders) and 55% had not (Non-responders). Overall, the majority of participants indicated a FHQ is an acceptable and understandable method of collecting family history information. Most prevalent reasons for not returning the FHQ were (bad) timing (56%), and difficulty accessing family history information (46%). Non-response was significantly associated with difficulty in asking relatives for the requested information (p = 0.011), and Non-responders cited fewer overall perceived benefits of cancer genetic counseling as compared with Responders (p < 0.0001). One quarter of Non-responders returned the mailed FHQ following administration of the telephone survey, suggesting implementation of a follow-up prompt is a cost-effective way to increase response.     

Cancer Genetics Service Interest in Women with a Limited Family History of Breast Cancer

Women with a limited family history of breast cancer may be interested in cancer genetics information although their objective risk of breast cancer may not indicate routine referral to cancer genetics services. This study examined factors related to interest and use of cancer genetics services in a community sample of women with a limited family history of breast cancer (N = 187) who had no previous contact with cancer genetics services. Participants provided demographic information and ratings of perceived risk, cancer distress, attitudes, and intentions to initiate cancer genetics services. Participants were given information about a cancer genetics clinic that served women having concerns about their breast cancer risk. Women were contacted within 6 weeks and 8 months following their study appointment. Six weeks following their study appointment, 25% of women had initiated cancer genetics services. Eight months following their study appointment, 18% of women reported having completed a cancer genetics service appointment. Baseline intentions independently predicted both initiation at 6 weeks and appointment at 8 months. Cancer distress was positively associated with cancer genetics service initiation and appointment. Results suggest that some women with a limited family history of breast cancer are interested in seeking out cancer genetics information. Women with a limited family history of breast cancer may benefit from the availability of cancer genetics information provided through primary healthcare settings.     

Women’s Decision Making about Risk-Reducing Strategies in the Context of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Women who have a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have up to an 87% lifetime risk of breast cancer and up to a 40% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Cancer prevention and early detection strategies are often considered by these women to address this heightened risk. Risk-reducing strategies include risk-reducing mastectomy and oophorectomy, breast and ovarian cancer screening, and chemoprevention. This systematic literature review summarizes the factors and contexts that influence decision making related to cancer risk-reducing strategies among women at high-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. In the 43 published research articles reviewed, three main types of factors are identified that influence high-risk women’s decisions about risk-reducing strategies: a) medical and physical factors, b) psychological factors and c) social context factors. How these factors operate in women’s lives over time remains unknown, and would best be elucidated through prospective, longitudinal research, as well as qualitative research.     

Family Communication and Genetic Counseling: The Case of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

In familial breast/ovarian cancer, the information that the proband is able to supply about other family members is of critical importance for genetic counseling. This frequently requires family communication. Forty-six women attending a cancer genetics clinic were interviewed as part of a longitudinal study. Nearly all reported affected maternal, rather than paternal relatives, which may indicate lack of awareness by women with paternal histories. There was also much more communication among female relatives. Mothers, where they were still alive, were key figures in supplying family information. Although the majority of the sample contacted at least one relative regarding counseling, most named a relative with whom they did not feel able to communicate on this subject. Probands balanced the perceived obligation of passing on information with that of not causing alarm. Communication, both obtaining and giving information, was impeded by adoption, divorce and remarriage, family rifts, and large age gaps between siblings.     

Providers’ Perceptions and Practices Regarding <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">BRCA1/2</Emphasis> Genetic Counseling and Testing in African American Women

We examined healthcare providers’ perceptions of genetic counseling and testing in African American women at moderate to high-risk of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation. We conducted 20 in-depth interviews with genetic counselors (n = 5), medical oncologists (n = 8), obstetrician/gynecologists (n = 2) and surgeons (n = 5). Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and independently coded by two individuals using a content analysis approach. Seven themes emerged relevant to providers’ perceptions of African American women’s use of BRCA1/2 genetic services: access factors, cultural beliefs and preferences, effects of testing, patient motivators for genetic counseling and testing, patient-provider communication, reasons for provider referral, and reasons for patient refusal. Providers identified individual- and system-level barriers to African American women’s use of genetic services, including lack of follow-up after referrals to genetic specialists and challenges to obtaining financial coverage for under- and uninsured high-risk women. Results have implications for physician and patient education regarding appropriate referrals to and uptake of genetic services in at-risk African American women.     

Primary Care Providers’ Responses to Patient-Generated Family History

Family health history is one of the best predictors of an individual’s risk for common disease, yet it is underutilized in routine care. Although the Surgeon General has recommended consumers record their family health history and share it with their health care provider, providers’ perceptions of patient-generated family histories are unknown. To learn more about providers’ experience with and perceptions about patient-generated family histories, we mailed surveys to 301 providers and had a response rate of 24% (n = 68). Seventy-three percent felt a patient-generated computer pedigree would improve their ability to assess risk as compared to their current methods. Seventy percent felt a patient-generated computer pedigree would either have no effect on or would increase the number of patients that could be seen in a day. Results suggest that providers appreciate the potential benefits of patient-generated family histories. Genetic counselors and nurses are in a prime position to promote and facilitate the use of patient-generated family health histories in routine care.     

Genetic Risk Assessment for Women with Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Referral Patterns and Outcomes in a University Gynecologic Oncology Clinic

Little is known about genetic service utilization and ovarian cancer. We identified the frequency and outcome of genetic counseling referral, predictors of referral, and referral uptake for ovarian cancer patients. Using pathology reports, we identified all epithelial ovarian cancer patients seen in a university gynecologic oncology clinic (1/04–8/06). Electronic medical records (EMR) were used to document genetic service referral, time from diagnosis-to-referral, point-in-treatment at referral, personal/family cancer history, demographics, and genetic test results. Groups were compared using chi-squared and Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous variables. The study population consisted of 376 women with ovarian cancer, 72 (19 %) of who were referred for genetic counseling/testing, primarily during surveillance. Of those referred, 42 (58 %) had personal or family genetic counseling and 34 (47 %) were ultimately tested or identified due to known family mutation. Family history and prior cancer were associated with referral. Family history, living in a larger community, higher-stage disease, and serous histology were associated with undergoing genetic counseling. Risk assessment identified 20 BRCA1/2 (5.3 %) and 1 HNPCC (0.3 %) mutation carriers. Based on recent estimates that 11.7–16.6 % of women with ovarian cancer are BRCA carriers and 2 % are HNPCC carriers, results suggest under-identification of carriers and under-utilization of genetic services by providers and patients. Interventions to increase medical providers’ referrals, even in a specialized oncology clinic, are necessary and may include innovations in educating these providers using web-based methods. Ease of referral by the introduction of an electronic cancer genetic referral form represents another new direction that may increase genetic risk assessment for high-risk women with ovarian cancer.     

The Utility of Genetic Counseling Prior to Offering First Trimester Screening Options

In order to evaluate the utility of genetic counseling at the time of first trimester screening in patients with no previously identified genetic concerns, we reviewed family history data for 700 women seen for genetic counseling in Utah during 2005-2006. The mean maternal age was 35 years (Range: 16–47 years). The majority of patients seen were non-Jewish Caucasians (90.8%, 634/700). A three-generation pedigree was obtained from each woman by one of two certified genetic counselors and subsequently classified as “negative” (no birth defects/genetic disorders); “positive” (birth defect or genetic condition with a minimal/low risk of recurrence; additional evaluation/genetic testing during pregnancy not indicated); or “significant” (birth defect or genetic condition with an increased risk of recurrence; additional evaluation/genetic testing during the pregnancy indicated). About 72% (501/700) of the histories were negative, 19% (134/700) were positive, and about 9% (65/700) were significant. Among patients with significant family histories, 66% (n = 43) were women less than 35 years of age. We conclude that assessing a patient’s family history at the time of first trimester serum screening is a valuable resource for pregnancy management.     

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.     

“Social Separation” Among Women Under 40 Years of Age Diagnosed with Breast Cancer and Carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation

We conducted an exploratory, qualitative study investigating experiences of women who had developed breast cancer under the age of 40 and who were identified as BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. These germline mutation carriers face an increased lifetime risk of a second primary breast cancer and an increased risk for a primary ovarian cancer. Thirteen women who fit this criteria participated in three focus groups conducted at a major cancer center in the UK during Spring 2003. We asked broad, open-ended questions that allowed for a wide range of responses about their cancer and genetic testing experiences, physical and psycho-social concerns, family and partner reactions and their need for social support. The women expressed feelings of devastation, loneliness, feeling different and isolation, ambivalence about having to support family members, worries about partner’s anxiety and depression, and anxiety about talking to family members, especially children. These feelings were stronger after the cancer diagnosis and compounded by the genetic test results that occurred at a later time. We also found that, at least temporarily, the women experienced what we call “social separation”—emotional distance from, or dissonance with groups they interact with or are part of, e.g., family and friends, frequently leading to a reduction in communication or a change in previously unstated, but accepted normal interaction. We concentrate on a few characteristics of social separation—feelings of aloneness, isolation and separation, use of silence and verbal discretion, the relationship between estrangement and kinship interaction and norm disruption, and are looking at social patterns of interpersonal relationships that may occur when risk and illness statuses are new and framing and feeling rules have not as yet been clearly developed due to a cultural lag.     

Perceptions of Familial Risk in those Seeking a Genetic Risk Assessment for Alzheimer’s Disease

Perceived risk is a complex concept that influences the genetic counseling process and can affect client coping and behavior. Although the association between family history and risk perception is well recognized in the literature, no studies have explored this relationship specifically in those seeking genetic susceptibility testing for a common chronic condition. REVEAL is a randomized trial assessing the impact of APOE disclosure and genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Using baseline REVEAL data, we hypothesized that there would be a significant association between the degree of AD family history and risk perception of AD, and that this relationship would be stronger in those who believed that genetics is a very important AD risk factor. In our sample of 293 participants, we found that a higher self-perceived risk of AD was associated with strength of family history of AD (p < 0.001), belief in genetics as an important AD risk factor (p < 0.001), being female (p < 0.001) and being Caucasian (p = 0.02). These results are the first to demonstrate the association between family history and risk perception in persons volunteering for genetic susceptibility testing for a common complex disease.     

The Impact of Social Roles on the Experience of Men in BRCA1/2 Families: Implications for Counseling

Recent advances in genetics have identified several genes associated with inherited susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer and have led to the commercial availability of mutation analyses. Although the majority of cancers associated with BRCA1/2 mutations are seen in women, men with BRCA1/2 mutations are at increased risk for male breast cancer, prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer and melanoma. Limited data available on the response of men in BRCA1/2 families suggest that the majority do not pursue genetic counseling, thus they may forgo the opportunity to improve health practices and to pass on valuable cancer risk information to offspring. The patterns of relationships of men within the family and society can pose challenges to their recognition of genetic health threats and the need for preventive interventions. Genetic counselors are in a position to inform at-risk males of their genetic risk, and to help them explore their personal health options.     

Clinical Characterization and Risk Profile of Individuals Seeking Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast Cancer in Brazil

Hereditary breast cancer (HBC) accounts for 5–10% of breast cancer cases and it significantly increases the lifetime risk of cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the sociodemographic variables, family history of cancer, breast cancer (BC) screening practices and the risk profile of cancer affected or asymptomatic at-risk women that undergo genetic counseling for hereditary breast cancer in public Brazilian cancer genetics services. Estimated lifetime risk of BC was calculated for asymptomatic women using the Gail and Claus models. The majority of women showed a moderate lifetime risk of developing BC, with an average risk of 19.7% and 19.9% by the Gail and Claus models, respectively. The average prior probability of carrying a BRCA1/2 gene mutation was 16.7% and overall only 32% fulfilled criteria for a hereditary breast cancer syndrome as assessed by family history. We conclude that a significant number of individuals at high-risk for HBC syndromes may not have access to the benefits of cancer genetic counseling in these centers. Contributing factors may include insufficient training of healthcare professionals, disinformation of cancer patients; difficult access to genetic testing and/or resistance in seeking such services. The identification and understanding of these barriers is essential to develop specific strategies to effectively achieve cancer risk reduction in this and other countries were clinical cancer genetics is not yet fully established.