Differential characteristics of Waldenström macroglobulinemia according to patterns of familial aggregation.

Familial aggregation of Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) and related B-cell disorders (BCDs) suggests a role for genetic factors, but few data address environmental influences. We designed a questionnaire-based study to examine clinical and environmental factors in a cohort of WM families with various patterns of case aggregation. We analyzed data on 103 WM patients and 272 unaffected relatives from 35 multiple-case WM and 46 mixed WM/BCD kindred and 28 nonfamilial (sporadic) WM patients, using logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for association. In this study population, the WM disease process appeared similar among patients regardless of family history. Familial WM patients were more likely than unaffected relatives to report a history of autoimmune disease (OR, 2.27; 95% CI = 1.21-4.28) and infections (OR, 2.13; 95% CI = 1.25-3.64). Familial WM patients were also more likely to report exposure to farming (OR, 2.70; 95% CI = 1.34-5.42), pesticides (OR, 2.83; 95% CI = 1.56-5.11), wood dust (OR, 2.86; 95% CI = 1.54-5.33), and organic solvents (multiple-case WM OR, 4.21; 95% CI = 1.69-10.51) compared with unaffected family members. These data provide clues to both genetic and environmental factors that may influence development of WM. Well-designed case-control studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Long-term evaluation of three multiple-case Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia families.

PURPOSE: Because the clinical significance of immunoglobulin abnormalities reported in relatives of familial Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) patients is unknown, we initiated a follow-up study of three WM families originally evaluated 27 years previously. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Of 29 eligible first-degree relatives of WM patients, 27 (93%) had originally participated in clinical and electrophoretic evaluations. We re-contacted all participants for prospective follow-up electrophoretic analysis and other studies. RESULTS: Initially, five relatives had IgM monoclonal gammopathy (IgM MG), and four had IgM polyclonal gammopathy (PG). Twenty-two relatives (81%) were re-evaluated. Median follow-up was 17 years (range, 7-27). At re-contact, all IgM MG persisted or progressed, including three that evolved to WM. Among the four with PG, two new IgM MG cases developed. Overall, seven relatives (26%) had IgM MG, and five (18%) had IgM PG. CONCLUSIONS: Although based on small numbers, this study provides the longest comprehensive follow-up of WM families to date. IgM MG seems to be a phenotypic marker of WM susceptibility in some families and may have a high risk of progression to WM. IgM PG may also be important in WM families. These observations require validation in larger studies and, if confirmed, may be used to identify a cohort (relatives with IgM MG) for future prevention strategies.

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families III: risk perception and screening.

This study aimed to ascertain whether cancer risk perception changed following the offer and subsequent receipt of BRCA1/2 results and to evaluate breast and ovarian screening practices in testers and non-testers. Members of thirteen HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a known family mutation. Perceived risk for developing breast cancer, ovarian cancer or for carrying the familial BRCA1/2 mutation, was assessed at baseline and again at 6-9 months following the receipt of test results. Breast and ovarian cancer screening data were obtained at both time-points. A total of 138 women participated and 120 (87%) chose to be tested for a known familial mutation. Twenty-eight women (24%) were identified as carriers and their perceived ovarian cancer risk and their perception of being a mutation carrier increased (P = 0.01 for both). Those testing negatives had a significant decrease in all dimensions of risk perception (P < 0.01). Regression analysis showed test results to be strong predictors of follow-up risk perception (P = 0.001), however, they were not predictors of screening practices at follow-up. Testers were more likely to have completed a clinical breast exam following testing than decliners. Mammography was positively associated with baseline adherence, age, and intrusive thoughts. Ovarian cancer worries only predicted pelvic ultrasound screening post-testing. Baseline practices and psychological factors appear to be stronger predictors of health behavior than test results.

Genomewide linkage screen for Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia susceptibility loci in high-risk families.

Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM), a distinctive subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma that features overproduction of immunoglobulin M (IgM), clearly has a familial component; however, no susceptibility genes have yet been identified. We performed a genomewide linkage analysis in 11 high-risk families with WM that were informative for linkage, for a total of 122 individuals with DNA samples, including 34 patients with WM and 10 patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (IgM MGUS). We genotyped 1,058 microsatellite markers (average spacing 3.5 cM), performed both nonparametric and parametric linkage analysis, and computed both two-point and multipoint linkage statistics. The strongest evidence of linkage was found on chromosomes 1q and 4q when patients with WM and with IgM MGUS were both considered affected; nonparametric linkage scores were 2.5 (P=.0089) and 3.1 (P=.004), respectively. Other locations suggestive of linkage were found on chromosomes 3 and 6. Results of two-locus linkage analysis were consistent with independent effects. The findings from this first linkage analysis of families at high risk for WM represent important progress toward identifying gene(s) that modulate susceptibility to WM and toward understanding its complex etiology.

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: impact on relationships.

Members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families often express concern during genetic counseling about the impact of BRCA1/2 testing on close relatives. Yet whether there are likely to be adverse effects of either the decision to undergo genetic testing or the results of testing on family relationships is unknown. One purpose of this study was to assess the impact on close family relationships. Within a randomized trial of breast cancer genetic counseling methods, members of 13 HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a known family mutation. The Family Relationship Index (FRI) of the Family Environment Scale (FES) was used to measure perceived family cohesion, conflict, and expressiveness at baseline and again 6-9 months following the receipt of test results, or at the equivalent time for those who declined testing. Participants (n = 212) completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Comparisons were made between testers and non-testers as well as between those who tested positive and negative for the family mutation. One hundred eighty-one participants elected to undergo genetic testing (85%) and 47 (26%) were identified to have a mutation. After adjusting for baseline family relationship scores, counseling intervention, gender and marital status, non-testers reported a greater increase in expressiveness (P = 0.006) and cohesion (P = 0.04) than testers. Individuals who tested positive reported a decrease in expressiveness (P = 0.07), although as a trend. Regardless of test decision or test result, those who were randomized to a client-centered counseling intervention reported a decrease in conflict (P = 0.006). Overall, study results suggest that undergoing genetic testing and learning ones BRCA1/2 status may affect family relationships. Those individuals who declined testing reported feeling closer to family members and more encouraged to express emotions to other family members demonstrating potential benefit from the offer of testing. Since those who tested positive reported feeling less encouraged to express their emotions within the family, we recommend helping clients to identify others with whom they feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and feelings about their positive gene status and increased cancer risk.

BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: effectiveness of problem-solving training as a counseling intervention.

It remains uncertain whether members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families experience psychological distress with genetic testing and whether pre-test counseling can have a moderating effect on client well-being. One purpose of this study was to assess change in psychological well-being from baseline to 6-9 months follow-up and the effect of a problem-solving training (PST) intervention on psychological well-being. Two hundred and twelve members of 13 HBOC families were offered BRCA1/2 testing for a previously identified family mutation. Participants received education and were randomized to one of two counseling interventions; PST or client-centered counseling. Psychological well-being was assessed at baseline and again at 6-9 months following the receipt of test results, or at the equivalent time for those participants who chose not to undergo testing. Well-being was assessed using measures of depressive symptoms (CESD), intrusive thoughts (IES), cancer worries, and self-esteem. Comparisons were made between those who chose testing and those who did not as well as between those who received positive and negative test results. One hundred eighty one participants elected to undergo genetic testing (85%) and 47 of these (26%) were identified as BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Breast and ovarian cancer worries decreased significantly (p = 0.007 and 0.008, respectively) in those who tested negative while there was no appreciable change in psychological well-being from baseline to follow-up in either those who tested positive or in non-testers. Among all participants, particularly testers, those randomized to PST had a greater reduction in depressive symptoms than those randomized to client-centered counseling (p < 0.05 and p = 0.02, respectively). Regardless of the decision to test, individuals with a personal history of cancer (n = 22) were more likely to have an increase in breast cancer worries compared to those who had never been diagnosed with cancer (p < 0.001). Results suggest that a problem-solving counseling intervention may help to enhance psychological well-being following testing and that a personal history of cancer may increase psychological distress associated with genetic testing.