[BRCA mutations and decision regret: a comprehensive analysis of existing research through a scoping review and reflections from a nursing perspective.] / Mutazioni BRCA e rimpianto decisionale: un'analisi approfondita della ricerca esistente tramite scoping review e riflessioni da una prospettiva infermieristica.

INTRODUCTION: Given the significance of healthcare decisions in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and their impact on patients' lives, this study aims to map the existing literature on decision regret in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria focused on decision regret in the female population with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations, with no restrictions on the methodologies of the included studies, but only in the English language. The selection process led to the inclusion of 13 studies. RESULTS: The analysis revealed a significant trend toward decision regret among patients facing complex medical choices. The quality of healthcare communication, decision support, and genetic counselling emerged as key factors influencing patients' perceptions and experiences, with direct implications for their quality of life and psychological well-being. The results suggest that these decisions considerably impact patients, both in terms of clinical outcomes and emotional experiences. DISCUSSION: The investigation highlights the vital importance of a personalized care approach, emphasizing the critical role of managing patients' emotional and psychological complexity. Managing decision regret requires acute attention to individual needs and effective communication to mitigate emotional impact and improve patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Insights from a nursing perspective in the analysis of results indicate the need for informed, empathetic, and integrated care that considers the emotional complexity of women with BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations in their lives and health choices.

Factors associated with psychological distress during genetic counseling in high-risk women with breast cancer in Turkey.

PURPOSE: This study aims to shed light on the rather neglected area of research of psychological distress in women facing genetic counselling in Turkey, where few institutions providing such counselling exist. METHODS: 105 breast cancer patients presenting for genetic testing completed a sociodemographic and clinical questionnaire as well as validated structured questionnaires including the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S/T) and the Health Motivation Sub-dimension of Champion's Health Belief Model Scale. RESULTS: 69.5% of the participants had lost a family member from cancer; 80% said the term "cancer" elicited negative thoughts (e.g., death, fear, and incurable disease). 62.9% and 37.1% attributed cancer to stress or sorrow, and genetic susceptibility, respectively. There was a negative association between health motivation and BDI scores (r:-0.433, p < 0.001). Married individuals had higher BDI and STAI-S scores (p = 0.001, p = 0.01 respectively), as well as lower STAI-T scores (p = 0.006). BDI, STAI-S and STAI-T scores were higher in those refusing genetic testing (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.003 respectively) and those with metastases (p = 0.03, p = 0.01, p = 0.03 respectively). Furthermore, individuals with low health motivation were more likely to exhibit high BDI scores (p < 0.001) and low STAI-T scores (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Common perceptions and beliefs about cancer and genetic testing during genetic counselling were found to have a negative impact on distress in high-risk women with breast cancer. The negative relationship between psychological distress and health motivation may reduce patients' compliance with genetic counselling recommendations. A comprehensive psychological evaluation should be considered as an important part of genetic counselling.

A Randomized Trial of Two Remote Health Care Delivery Models on the Uptake of Genetic Testing and Impact on Patient-Reported Psychological Outcomes in Families With Pancreatic Cancer: The Genetic Education, Risk Assessment, and Testing (GENERATE) Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Genetic testing uptake for cancer susceptibility in family members of patients with cancer is suboptimal. Among relatives of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), The GENetic Education, Risk Assessment, and TEsting (GENERATE) study evaluated 2 online genetic education/testing delivery models and their impact on patient-reported psychological outcomes. METHODS: Eligible participants had ≥1 first-degree relative with PDAC, or ≥1 first-/second-degree relative with PDAC with a known pathogenic germline variant in 1 of 13 PDAC predisposition genes. Participants were randomized by family, between May 8, 2019, and June 1, 2021. Arm 1 participants underwent a remote interactive telemedicine session and online genetic education. Arm 2 participants were offered online genetic education only. All participants were offered germline testing. The primary outcome was genetic testing uptake, compared by permutation tests and mixed-effects logistic regression models. We hypothesized that Arm 1 participants would have a higher genetic testing uptake than Arm 2. Validated surveys were administered to assess patient-reported anxiety, depression, and cancer worry at baseline and 3 months postintervention. RESULTS: A total of 424 families were randomized, including 601 participants (n = 296 Arm 1; n = 305 Arm 2), 90% of whom completed genetic testing (Arm 1 [87%]; Arm 2 [93%], P = .014). Arm 1 participants were significantly less likely to complete genetic testing compared with Arm 2 participants (adjusted ratio [Arm1/Arm2] 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98). Among participants who completed patient-reported psychological outcomes questionnaires (Arm 1 [n = 194]; Arm 2 [n = 206]), the intervention did not affect mean anxiety, depression, or cancer worry scores. CONCLUSIONS: Remote genetic education and testing can be a successful and complementary option for delivering genetics care. (Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT03762590).

The experience of receiving a letter from a cancer genetics clinic about risk for hereditary cancer.

Direct contact may be an option for supporting disclosure in families with hereditary cancer risk. In this qualitative interview study, we explored how healthy at-risk relatives experience receiving a letter with information about hereditary cancer directly from healthcare rather than via a relative. The study is part of an ongoing multicentre randomised clinical trial in Sweden that evaluates the effectiveness of direct letters from cancer genetics clinics to at-risk relatives. After conducting semi-structured interviews with 14 relatives who had received a letter and contacted the clinic, we analysed the data using thematic analysis. The relatives had different levels of prior knowledge about the hereditary cancer assessment. Many had been notified by family that a letter was coming but some had not. Overall, these participants believed healthcare-mediated disclosure could complement family-mediated disclosure. They expressed that the letter and the message raised concerns and a need for counselling, and they wanted healthcare to be accessible and informed when making contact. The participants found the message easier to cope with when they had been notified by a family member beforehand, with a general attitude that notifying relatives was the appropriate step to take. They thought healthcare should help patients with the disclosure process but also guard the right of at-risk relatives to be informed. The findings support a direct approach from healthcare as a possible complement to an established model of family-mediated risk disclosure, but implementation must be made within existing frameworks of good practice for genetic counselling.

Experiences of pediatric cancer patients (age 12-18 years) with extensive germline sequencing for cancer predisposition: a qualitative study.

This study explored the experiences and needs of adolescents, ranging from 12 to 18 years old, who have recently been diagnosed with cancer and participated in a nationwide germline genetic sequencing study within the context of pediatric oncology. The 21 adolescents in this qualitative interview study viewed genetic sequencing as an integral part of their cancer journey. They often characterized germline sequencing as "good-to-know" without specifying immediate utility. While the adolescents comprehended the significance of germline genetic sequencing, they were less focused on its potential long-term implications. Adolescents expressed a strong desire to be actively engaged in decisions related to genetics. They advocated for a participatory role in genetic decision-making from a young age onwards. They recommended that re-consent should be sought before re-analysis of their genetic data is performed and believe that patients should have the opportunity to provide (re-)consent once they reach adulthood. Moreover, the adolescents emphasized the importance of developing counseling materials that are not only concise but also visually attractive. In conclusion, this study underscores the positive perception that adolescents diagnosed with cancer hold regarding germline genetic sequencing. They articulate a strong interest in being actively involved in genetic decision-making. To address these articulated needs and preferences, we recommend the development of visually engaging counseling materials. These materials should effectively convey both the immediate and long-term implications of genetic sequencing, enabling adolescents with cancer to make informed decisions about genetic sequencing.

Systematic evidence review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with cancer genetic counseling.

PURPOSE: Genetic counseling (GC) is standard of care in genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). A rigorous assessment of the data reported from published studies is crucial to ensure the evidence-based implementation of GC. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 patient-reported and health-services-related outcomes associated with pre- and post-test GC in GCRA in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: Twenty-five of 5393 screened articles met inclusion criteria. No articles reporting post-test GC outcomes met inclusion criteria. For patient-reported outcomes, pre-test GC significantly decreased worry, increased knowledge, and decreased perceived risk but did not significantly affect patient anxiety, depression, decisional conflict, satisfaction, or intent to pursue genetic testing. For health-services outcomes, pre-test GC increased correct genetic test ordering, reduced inappropriate services, increased spousal support for genetic testing, and expedited care delivery but did not consistently improve cancer prevention behaviors nor lead to accurate risk assessment. The GRADE certainty in the evidence was very low or low. No included studies elucidated GC effect on mortality, cascade testing, cost-effectiveness, care coordination, shared decision making, or patient time burden. CONCLUSION: The true impact of GC on relevant outcomes is not known low quality or absent evidence. Although a meta-analysis found that pre-test GC had beneficial effects on knowledge, worry, and risk perception, the certainty of this evidence was low according to GRADE methodology. Further studies are needed to support the evidence-based application of GC in GCRA.

Pretest Video Education Versus Genetic Counseling for Patients With Prostate Cancer: ProGen, A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Germline genetic testing (GT) is recommended for men with prostate cancer (PC), but testing through traditional models is limited. The ProGen study examined a novel model aimed at providing access to GT while promoting education and informed consent. METHODS: Men with potentially lethal PC (metastatic, localized with a Gleason score of ≥8, persistent prostate-specific antigen after local therapy), diagnosis age ≤55 years, previous malignancy, and family history suggestive of a pathogenic variant (PV) and/or at oncologist's discretion were randomly assigned 3:1 to video education (VE) or in-person genetic counseling (GC). Participants had 67 genes analyzed (Ambry), with results disclosed via telephone by a genetic counselor. Outcomes included GT consent, GT completion, PV prevalence, and survey measures of satisfaction, psychological impact, genetics knowledge, and family communication. Two-sided Fisher's exact tests were used for between-arm comparisons. RESULTS: Over a 2-year period, 662 participants at three sites were randomly assigned and pretest VE (n = 498) or GC (n = 164) was completed by 604 participants (VE, 93.1%; GC, 88.8%), of whom 596 participants (VE, 98.9%; GC, 97.9%) consented to GT and 591 participants completed GT (VE, 99.3%; GC, 98.6%). These differences were not statistically significant although subtle differences in satisfaction and psychological impact were. Notably, 84 PVs were identified in 78 participants (13.2%), with BRCA1/2 PV comprising 32% of participants with a positive result (BRCA2 n = 21, BRCA1 n = 4). CONCLUSION: Both VE and traditional GC yielded high GT uptake without significant differences in outcome measures of completion, GT uptake, genetics knowledge, and family communication. The increased demand for GT with limited genetics resources supports consideration of pretest VE for patients with PC.

Identifying Mediators of Intervention Effects Within a Randomized Controlled Trial to Motivate Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment Among Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors.

BACKGROUND: A theory-guided Tailored Counseling and Navigation (TCN) intervention successfully increased cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) uptake among cancer survivors at increased risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Understanding the pathways by which interventions motivate behavior change is important for identifying the intervention's active components. PURPOSE: We examined whether the TCN intervention exerted effects on CGRA uptake through hypothesized theoretical mediators. METHODS: Cancer survivors at elevated risk for HBOC were recruited from three statewide cancer registries and were randomly assigned to three arms: TCN (n = 212), Targeted Print (TP, n = 216), and Usual Care (UC, n = 213). Theoretical mediators from the Extended Parallel Process Model, Health Action Planning Approach, and Ottawa Decision Support Framework were assessed at baseline and 1-month follow-up; CGRA uptake was assessed at 6 months. Generalized structural equation modeling was used for mediation analysis. RESULTS: The TCN effects were most strongly mediated by behavioral intention alone (ß = 0.49 and 0.31) and by serial mediation through self-efficacy and intention (ß = 0.041 and 0.10) when compared with UC and TP, respectively. In addition, compared with UC, the TCN also increased CGRA through increased perceived susceptibility, knowledge of HBOC, and response efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Risk communication and behavioral change interventions for hereditary cancer should stress a person's increased genetic risk and the potential benefits of genetic counseling and testing, as well as bolster efficacy beliefs by helping remove barriers to CGRA. System-level and policy interventions are needed to further expand access.

It is recommended that cancer survivors at increased risk for heredity seek cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA), which includes cancer genetic counseling and genetic testing. A Tailored Counseling and Navigation (TCN) intervention successfully increased CGRA uptake among women with a history of cancer who enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. Understanding reasons for TCN's effectiveness can guide future interventions that use risk messages and behavior change techniques. We conducted mediation analyses, which enabled identification of the TCN's active components. Eligible breast and ovarian cancer survivors (n = 641) were recruited from three statewide cancer registries and were assigned to three groups: TCN, Targeted Print, and Usual Care. Mediator variables drawn from behavioral and risk communication theories were assessed at baseline and 1-month follow-up; CGRA uptake was assessed at 6 months. The strongest mediator was intention to obtain a CGRA, followed by self-efficacy, perceived risk, knowledge of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and perceived CGRA benefits. Risk communication and behavioral change interventions for hereditary cancer should stress a person's increased genetic risk and the potential benefits of genetic counseling and testing, as well as bolster efficacy beliefs by helping remove CGRA barriers. System-level and policy interventions are needed to further expand access.

Genetic counseling and testing for females at elevated risk for breast cancer: Protocol for the randomized controlled trial of the Know Your Risk intervention.

BACKGROUND: Genetic counseling and testing have an important role in the care of patients at elevated risk for breast cancer. However, conventional pre- and post-test genetic counseling is labor and time intensive, less accessible for patients living outside major urban centers, and impractical on a large scale. A patient-driven approach to genetic counseling and testing may increase access, improve patients' experiences, affect efficiency of clinical practice, and help meet workforce demand. The objective of this 2-arm randomized controlled trial is to determine the efficacy of Know Your Risk (KYR), a genetic counseling patient preference intervention. METHODS: Females (n = 1000) at elevated risk (>20% lifetime) for breast cancer will be randomized to the KYR intervention or conventional genetic counseling. The study will provide comprehensive assessment of breast cancer risk by multigene panel testing and validated polygenic risk score. Primary outcome is adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for a clinical encounter every 6-12 months and an annual mammogram (breast MRI if recommended) determined by medical record review. Secondary outcomes include adherence to other recommended cancer screening tests determined by medical record review and changes in breast cancer knowledge, perception of risk, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling by completion of three surveys during the study. Study aims will be evaluated for non-inferiority of the KYR intervention compared to conventional genetic counseling. CONCLUSION: If efficacious, the KYR intervention has the potential to improve patients' experience and may change how genetic counseling is delivered, inform best practices, and reduce workforce burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT05325151.

A Randomized Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of Pre-test Genetic Counseling Using an Artificial Intelligence Automated Chatbot and Traditional In-person Genetic Counseling in Women Newly Diagnosed with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Alternative service delivery models are critically needed to address the increasing demand for genetics services and limited supply of genetics experts available to provide pre-test counseling. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial of women with stage 0-III breast cancer not meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing. Patients were randomized to pre-test counseling with a Chatbot or a certified genetic counselor (GC). Participants completed a questionnaire assessing their knowledge of breast cancer genetics and a survey assessing satisfaction with their decision regarding pre-test counseling. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients were enrolled and 37 were randomized to genetic counseling with an automated Chatbot or a GC; 19 were randomized to Chatbot and 18 to traditional genetic counseling, and 13 (38.2%) had a family member with breast cancer but did not meet NCCN criteria. All patients opted to undergo genetic testing. Testing revealed six pathogenic variants in five patients (13.5%): CHEK2 (n = 2), MSH3 (n = 1), MUTYH (n = 1), and BRCA1 and HOXB13 (n = 1). No patients had a delay in time-to-treatment due to genetic testing turnaround time, nor did any patients undergo additional risk reducing surgery. There was no significant difference in median knowledge score between Chatbot and traditional counseling (11 vs. 12, p = 0.09) or in median patient satisfaction score (30 vs. 30, p = 0.19). CONCLUSION: Satisfaction and comprehension in patients with breast cancer undergoing pre-test genetic counseling using an automated Chatbot is comparable to in-person genetic testing. Utilization of this technology can offer improved access to care and a much-needed alternative for pre-test counseling.

Effects of a pre-visit online information tool about genetic counselling for ovarian cancer patients, a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the Netherlands, patients with ovarian cancer are offered genetic testing. Pre-test preparation may help counseling patients. The aim of this study was to determine if use of a web-based intervention, leads to more effective genetic counseling of ovarian cancer patients. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2018, 127 ovarian cancer patients referred for genetic counseling in our hospital participated in this trial. 104 Patients were analyzed. All patients filled out questionnaires pre- and post-counseling. The intervention group also completed a questionnaire after visiting an online tool. Length of consultation, patients' satisfaction, knowledge, anxiety, depression and distress were compared before and after counselling. RESULTS: The intervention group had the same level of knowledge compared to the counseling group, but at an earlier point in time. They were satisfied with the intervention (86%) and better prepared for counseling (66%). The intervention did not lead to shorter consultations. No differences in levels of anxiety, depression, distress and satisfaction were observed. CONCLUSION: Although consultation length was unaffected, the improvements in knowledge after online education and patients satisfaction indicates that this tool can be an effective addition to genetic counseling. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Use of an educational tool may lead to a more effective, personalized way of genetic counselling and enables shared decision making.

Addressing disparities in the uptake of genetic counseling and testing in African American women; rationale, design and methods.

BACKGROUND: Genetic counseling and testing (GCT) informs risk reduction and management strategies in women at risk for carrying a pathogenic variation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes. African American (hereinafter referred to as Black) women are less likely to receive GCT services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The objective of this work was to examine existing literature regarding successful culturally tailored GCT interventions for Black women and to describe the rationale and protocol for a randomized feasibility trial to test the efficacy of a culturally tailored GCT intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: The For Our Health (FOH) study is a two-arm randomized control trial designed to test the efficacy of a video intervention to promote the uptake of GCT among Black women with a high risk of HBOC. The culturally tailored video intervention targets key beliefs, knowledge gaps, misconceptions, and key anticipated emotions relevant for GCT. After completing the baseline survey, 50 women at risk of HBOC will be randomized (1:1) to one of two trial arms: a YouTube video intervention or a publicly available fact sheet. Final assessments will immediately follow receipt of either video or fact sheet. CONCLUSION: Few studies have tested interventions to improve GCT uptake among Black women. The FOH trial will fill an important scientific gap in knowledge regarding strategies to reduce disparities in GCT among Black women at risk of HBOC.

Patients' experiences with pre-test genetic counseling provided by breast cancer healthcare professionals: Results from a large prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-test genetic counseling of patients with breast cancer is increasingly being offered by non-genetic healthcare professionals. We aimed to evaluate the experiences of patients with breast cancer receiving pre-test genetic counseling from a non-genetic healthcare professional (i.e., surgeon or nurse). METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer and received pre-test counseling from their surgeon or nurse (mainstream group), and patients who received pre-test counseling from a clinical geneticist (usual care group) were invited to participate in our multicenter study. Between September 2019 and December 2021, patients received a questionnaire after pre-test counseling (T0) and four weeks after receiving their test results (T1) to evaluate psychosocial outcomes, knowledge, discussed topics and satisfaction. RESULTS: We included 191 patients in our mainstream and 183 patients in our usual care group and received, respectively 159 and 145 follow-up questionnaires. Levels of distress and decisional regret were comparable in both groups. Decisional conflict was higher in our mainstream group (p = 0.01), but only 7% had clinically relevant decisional conflict (vs 2% in usual care group). The possible implications of a genetic test on (secondary) breast or ovarian cancer risks were less frequently discussed in our mainstream group (p = 0.03 and p = 0.000, respectively). In both groups knowledge about genetics was comparable, satisfaction was high and the majority of patients in both groups preferred to give both verbal and written consent for genetic testing. CONCLUSION: Mainstreamed genetic care provides sufficient information for the majority of breast cancer patients to decide about genetic testing with minimal distress.

Medical interpreter-mediated genetic counseling for Spanish preferring adults at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome.

The objective of this study was to identify interpretation challenges specific to exome sequencing and errors of potential clinical significance in the context of genetic counseling for adults at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome. Thirty transcripts of interpreter-mediated telephone results disclosure genetic counseling appointments were coded for errors by bilingual researchers, and the coders applied an overall rating to denote the degree to which the errors interfered with communication overall. Genetic counselors reviewed a subset of errors flagged for potential clinical significance to identify those likely to have clinical impact. Qualitative interviews with 19 interpreters were analyzed to elucidate the challenges they face in interpreting for genetic counseling appointments. Our analysis identified common interpretation errors such as raising the register, omissions, and additions. Further, we found errors specific to genetic counseling concepts and content that appeared to impact the ability of the genetic counselor to accurately assess risk. These errors also may have impacted the patient's ability to understand their results, access appropriate follow-up care, and communicate with family members. Among interpreters' strengths was the use of requests for clarification; in fact, even more use of clarification would have been beneficial in these encounters. Qualitative interviews surfaced challenges stemming from the structure of interpreter work, such as switching from medical and nonmedical interpretations without substantial breaks. Importantly, while errors were frequent, most did not impede communication overall, and most were not likely to impact clinical care. Nevertheless, potentially clinically impactful errors in communication of genetics concepts may contribute to inequitable care for limited English proficient patients and suggest that additional training in genetics and specialization in healthcare may be warranted. In addition, training for genetic counselors and guidance for patients in working effectively with interpreters could enhance interpreters' transmission of complex genetic concepts.

Defining orienting language in the genetic counseling process.

We defined orienting language in genetic counseling sessions as 'language intended to direct focus to a particular aspect of the counseling process; a physical, emotional, or cognitive space; or an outcome'. This is a concept expanding on the idea of 'orientation' statements in the genetic counseling literature. We propose that orienting language is an important component of effective communication in the genetic counseling process. Our goals were to document the presence of orienting language in genetic counseling sessions with practicing genetic counselors and simulated clients, categorize types of orienting language, and evaluate the purpose of this language. A sample of Genetic Counseling Video Project videotape transcripts was evaluated through consensus coding for orienting language. Orienting language was found to be abundant in the dataset evaluated. Each excerpt was coded for orienting language Strategies and Purpose. The six categories of Strategy codes identified were Logical Consistency, Providing Context, Guidance, Structuring the Session, Anchoring, and Procedural. The six categories of Purpose codes were Counselee Understanding, Guidance, Engagement, Promoting Effective Counselor/Counselee Interactions, Counselee Adaptation, and Relationship Building. Results support our expanded definition of orienting language, which was similar in both cancer and prenatal specialties and across years of counselor experience. Orienting language acts as a series of signposts to help clients navigate the sometimes complex and unfamiliar territory of a genetic counseling session. The introduction of this term into the genetic counseling literature allows its use by genetic counselors to be further evaluated and potentially incorporated into genetic counselor training.

Measuring high-risk parents' opinions about direct-to-consumer genetic testing for adult-onset inherited cancer syndromes in their adolescent and young adult children.

Neither direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing nor predictive genetic testing for adult-onset conditions is recommended for minor children due to ethical concerns and low clinical utility. However, parents with pathogenic variants (PVs) in disease-causing genes may be interested in pursuing genetic testing that includes the familial PV for their children. The Pediatric Testing Attitudes Scale (P-TAS) was previously developed to examine high-risk parents' opinions about pediatric BRCA genetic testing for adult-onset breast/ovarian cancer. Here, the psychometric properties of the P-TAS were examined in a new sample of N = 126 parents (M age = 47.2 years) with PVs in a more complete set of cancer risk genes represented on DTC panel tests. The mean score on the P-TAS was 44 out of a maximum score of 60, indicating that a majority of parents generally held favorable opinions about testing their children for adult-onset inherited cancer syndromes. The internal consistency of the full scale was high (α = 0.91). A factor analysis identified two-component scales, labeled Attitudes and Beliefs (α = 0.93) and Decision Making and Communication (α = 0.83). In a multivariable regression model, P-TAS co-factors accounted for 34% of variance in parental opinions, including the frequency of prior family communication about cancer and the likelihood of utilizing DTC genetic testing with children (R2  = 0.34, p < 0.001). Results suggest that the P-TAS remains a reliable measure to assess high-risk parents' opinions about pediatric DTC genetic testing for adult-onset conditions, with promising validity. Applications of the P-TAS include informing genetic counseling practice, pediatric medical care, and policy guidelines surrounding DTC genetic testing.

Role of psychological background in cancer susceptibility genetic testing distress: It is not only about a positive result.

Clinical and familial factors predict psychological distress after genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. However, the contribution of an individual's psychological background to such distress is unclear. This study aims to analyze the psychological impact of genetic testing and to identify the profile of individuals at higher risk. This is a longitudinal multicenter study of individuals undergoing genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Demographic, clinical, genetic, familial, and psychological (personality types, cancer worry) characteristics were assessed by validated questionnaires the day of genetic testing. Distress, uncertainty, and positive experience perception (MICRA scale) were evaluated at the results disclosure visit, and 3 and 12 months afterwards. Multivariate analysis was performed. A total of 714 individuals were included. A high neuroticism score, high baseline cancer worry, and a positive genetic test result were independently associated with higher psychological impact (p-value < 0.05). The highest risk profile (10% of the cohort) included women with high level of neuroticism and a positive result. Uncertainty was mainly associated with a high level of neuroticism, regardless of the genetic test result. A holistic approach to personalized germline genetic counseling should include the assessment of personality dimensions.

Cultural adaptations to a telephone genetic counseling protocol and booklet for Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Telephone genetic counseling (TGC) is accepted as standard clinical care for people seeking hereditary cancer risk assessment. TGC has been shown to be non-inferior to in-person genetic counseling, but trials have been conducted with a predominantly highly educated, non-Hispanic White population. This article describes the process of culturally adapting a TGC protocol and visual aid booklet for Spanish-preferring Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. The adaptation process included two phases. Phase 1 involved a review of the literature and recommendations from an expert team including community partners. Phase 2 included interviews and a pilot with the target population (n = 14) to collect feedback about the adapted protocol and booklet following steps from the Learner Verification and Revision Framework. We describe the adaptation process and report the main adaptations following the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Interventions (FRAME). Adaptations in Phase 1 were responsive to the target population needs and characteristics (e.g., delivered in Spanish at an appropriate health literacy level, addressing knowledge gaps, targeting cultural values). Phase 2 interviews were crucial to refine details (e.g., selecting words) and to add components to address GCT barriers (e.g., saliva sample video). Cultural adaptations to evidence-based TGC protocols can increase the fit and quality of care for historically underserved populations. As TGC visits become routine in clinical care, it is crucial to consider the needs of diverse communities to adequately promote equity and justice in cancer care.

This article describes the process of adapting a telephone genetic counseling protocol and visual aid booklet for Spanish-preferring Latina breast cancer survivors at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The cultural adaptation process followed two phases. In the first phase, the authors reviewed the literature and obtained insights from interdisciplinary experts. In the second phase, the authors received iterative feedback from fourteen Latina women who were breast cancer survivors, spoke Spanish as a first language, and met criteria to be considered at increased risk for HBOC. Revisions to the protocol and visual aid booklet were conducted iteratively following feedback from the expert team, after the first five women reviewed the booklet, after the second five women reviewed the booklet, and after the final four women completed the entire culturally adapted telephone genetic counseling protocol with the booklet. The final adaptations to the protocol and visual aid booklet were responsive to the target population's needs. Most adaptations made were regarding content. For example, simplifying the material presented, adding culturally relevant images, and developing a video explaining how to collect a saliva sample. Culturally adapting health interventions can improve health outcomes in historically marginalized populations and promote equity.

Informational needs of individuals from families harboring BRCA pathogenic variants: A systematic review and content analysis.

PURPOSE: Personalized information is paramount to patient-centered communication and decision-making regarding risk management in hereditary cancer syndromes. This systematic review identified information needs of individuals from families harboring BRCA pathogenic variants and compared findings based on gender (women vs men) and clinical characteristics (patients with cancer vs previvors and BRCA heterozygotes vs untested relatives). METHODS: We screened 8115 studies identified from databases and citation searching. The quality of selected studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Narrative synthesis was conducted based on content analysis. RESULTS: From 18 selected studies including 1063 individuals, we identified 9 categories of information needs. Risk of bias in the selected studies was moderate. Men, untested relatives, and racial and ethnic minorities were underrepresented. Frequently required information was personalized cancer risk and risk-reducing strategies, including decision-making, family implications of hereditary cancers, psychological issues, and cascade testing. Subgroup analyses showed that information needs depended on gender, personal cancer history, and cascade testing in relatives. CONCLUSION: We identified comprehensive and detailed informational needs of individuals from families harboring BRCA pathogenic variants and gaps in international guidelines. Needs for personalized information varied based on gender, health, and genetic testing status. Findings of this study have implications for genetic counseling, tailoring educational materials, and personalizing interventions.

Latinx attitudes, barriers, and experiences with genetic counseling and testing: A systematic review.

As genetics is increasingly used across clinical settings, there is a need to understand the impact and experiences of diverse patients. This review systematically examined research literature on Latinx experiences with genetic counseling and genetic testing (GC/GT) in the United States, synthesizing key themes and knowledge gaps pertaining to both patient experience and hypothetical scenarios. Findings were based on a systematic search, inclusion, and thematic analysis of 81 empirical peer-reviewed articles published from January 1990 to July 2019 pertaining to Latinx populations and GC/GT. Studies most commonly addressed Latinas' perspectives on GC/GT in prenatal settings or for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Costs, referrals, and communication were significant barriers to accessing genetic services for many Latinx patients, particularly those with low English proficiency (LEP). Studies highlighted difficulties accessing and communicating in healthcare settings, and how medical context and prior experience with healthcare workers and institutions influenced GC/GT decision-making. Providers' implicit biases about Latinx patients negatively impacted their care and impeded communication. Despite low awareness of cancer GT, Latinx patients often reported interest in learning more about GC/GT or unmet needs for GT discussion and provider involvement. This systematic review identified areas where providers can take action to improve Latinx experiences with GC/GT. Clinicians should elicit and respond to patient preferences about shared decision-making. For patients with low numeracy or LEP, providers should consider tailored educational and communication techniques. Most studies focused on HBOC and prenatal testing, and Latinx patients are heterogeneous, leaving many research questions about Latinx experience with GT/GC in other clinical areas.