"I Don't Want to Be an Ostrich": Managing Mothers' Uncertainty during BRCA1/2 Genetic Counseling.

Families who face genetic disease risk must learn how to grapple with complicated uncertainties about their health and future on a long-term basis. Women who undergo BRCA 1/2 genetic testing describe uncertainty related to personal risk as well as their loved ones', particularly daughters', risk. The genetic counseling setting is a prime opportunity for practitioners to help mothers manage uncertainty in the moment but also once they leave a session. Uncertainty Management Theory (UMT) helps to illuminate the various types of uncertainty women encounter and the important role of communication in uncertainty management. Informed by UMT, we conducted a thematic analysis of 16 genetic counseling sessions between practitioners and mothers at risk for, or carriers of, a BRCA1/2 mutation. Five themes emerged that represent communication strategies used to manage uncertainty: 1) addresses myths, misunderstandings, or misconceptions; 2) introduces uncertainty related to science; 3) encourages information seeking or sharing about family medical history; 4) reaffirms or validates previous behavior or decisions; and 5) minimizes the probability of personal risk or family members' risk. Findings illustrate the critical role of genetic counseling for families in managing emotionally challenging risk-related uncertainty. The analysis may prove beneficial to not only genetic counseling practice but generations of families at high risk for cancer who must learn strategic approaches to managing a complex web of uncertainty that can challenge them for a lifetime.

Preliminary validation of a consumer-oriented colorectal cancer risk assessment tool compatible with the US Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait.

PURPOSE: This study examines the analytic validity of a software tool designed to provide individuals with risk assessments for colorectal cancer based on personal health and family history information. The software is compatible with the US Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait (MFHP). METHODS: An algorithm for risk assessment was created using accepted colorectal risk assessment guidelines and programmed into a software tool (MFHP). Risk assessments derived from 150 pedigrees using the MFHP tool were compared with "gold standard" risk assessments developed by three expert cancer genetic counselors. RESULTS: Genetic counselor risk assessments showed substantial, but not perfect, agreement. MFHP risk assessments for colorectal cancer yielded a sensitivity for colorectal cancer risk of 81% (95% confidence interval: 54-96%) and specificity of 90% (95% confidence interval: 83-94%), as compared with genetic counselor pedigree review. The positive predictive value for risk for MFHP was 48% (95% confidence interval: 29-68%), whereas the negative predictive value was 98% (95% confidence interval: 93-99%). Agreement between MFHP and genetic counselor pedigree review was moderate (κ = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The analytic validity of the MFHP colorectal cancer risk assessment software is similar to those of other types of screening tools used in primary care. Future investigations should explore the clinical validity and utility of the software in diverse population groups.Genet Med 17 9, 753-756.

Assessment of individuals with BRCA1 and BRCA2 large rearrangements in high-risk breast and ovarian cancer families.

BRCA1/2 large rearrangement (LR) testing has been available to patients since 2006. Three existing models commonly used in cancer genetics clinical and research settings (BRCAPRO, Penn II and Myriad II) have not been assessed for their performance in predicting the presence of BRCA1/2 large genomic rearrangements in patients who do not have mutations detectable by the traditional Sanger sequencing approach. This study sought to determine if there is an optimal pre-test probability "cut off" value, calculated using these models, to optimize detection of large rearrangements (LRs). Our cohort consisted of 3,301 probands seen for genetic counseling and BRCA1/2 clinical testing from September 2006 to September 2011. A detailed personal and three-generation family history, including self-reported ethnicity, was taken as part of our standard clinical practice. We applied the BRCAPRO, Penn II, and Myriad II models to the probands with LRs. In our cohort of 3,301 probands, 150 carried a non-Ashkenazi mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Seventeen unrelated probands carried a private BRCA1/2 LR (17/150, 11.3 % of all detectable non-AJ mutations). At a pre-test probability cutoff of 10 %, all three empiric risk models would have failed to identify almost 30 % of probands with LRs. Our study shows that BRCA1/2 LR testing should be offered to all women who meet criteria for BRCA1/2 sequence analysis.

Sources of uncertainty about daughters' breast cancer risk that emerge during genetic counseling consultations.

Uncertainty is central to the experience of genetic decision making and counseling about cancer risk. Women seeking genetic counseling about their breast cancer risk may experience a great deal of uncertainty about issues related to their daughters. We used a theory of Communication and Uncertainty Management to guide analysis of sources of uncertainty about daughters that emerged during 16 video-recorded and transcribed conversations between mothers at risk for a BRCA 1/2 mutation and their genetic healthcare practitioners. An interpretive design and constant comparative method revealed three dominant patterns or themes representing sources of uncertainty mothers have relating to their daughters: disease risk, future cancer screening, and communication of related information to daughters. Both practitioners and mothers discussed these aspects of uncertainty. The findings identify the significant role uncertainty and familial concerns play in mothers' genetic testing decision making process. To assist genetic practitioners, we highlight daughter-related concerns that mothers are uncertain about and which are vital to their genetic counseling needs.

Outcome of genetic evaluation of patients with kidney cancer referred for suspected hereditary cancer syndromes.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze patients with kidney cancer referred for evaluation at a high-volume genetics service at a comprehensive cancer center and identify factors associated with positive tests for hereditary cancer syndromes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients referred to the Clinical Genetics Service at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center was performed, and patients with a personal history of kidney cancer were identified. Patient and disease characteristics were reviewed. In all, 4 variables including age at diagnosis of kidney tumor, presence of syndromic manifestations, family history of kidney cancer, and number of primary malignancies were evaluated for association with positive test results in 2 groups: patients tested for renal cell carcinoma syndromes and Lynch syndrome. Guidance for genetic testing strategy in patients with kidney cancer is provided. RESULTS: Between 1999 and 2012, 120 patients with a history of kidney cancer were evaluated by the Clinical Genetics Service. The mean age at kidney cancer diagnosis was 52 years (interquartile range: 42-63), with 57% being women. A family history of kidney cancer was reported by 39 patients (33%). Time between diagnosis of first cancer and genetic consultation was <1 year in 54%, 2 to 5 years in 23%, and>5 years in the remaining 23%. Overall, 95 patients were tested for genetic abnormalities with 27 (28%) testing positive. Testing for renal cell carcinoma (RCC)-related syndromes was performed on 43 patients, with 13 testing positive (30%). Lynch syndrome testing was positive in 9 patients (32%) after 28 were tested. In RCC-associated syndromes, young age of diagnosis was associated with positive test results. Conversely, syndromic manifestations and increasing number of primary malignancies were associated with positive Lynch testing. CONCLUSIONS: The discovery of inherited kidney cancer syndromes has provided a unique opportunity to identify patients at increased risk for cancer. Factors associated with positive genetic testing are unique to different syndromes. These data suggest that in kidney cancer patients evaluated for hereditary cancer syndromes, young age is associated with diagnosis of RCC syndromes, whereas syndromic manifestations and multiple primaries are found in Lynch syndrome. These results, along with clinical awareness, may be useful for practicing urologists to select patients with kidney cancer to refer for genetic counseling.

Clinical features and management of BRCA1 and BRCA2-associated prostate cancer.

It is thought that over forty percent of an individual's risk of developing prostate cancer (PCa) is related to familial and genetic factors. Although multiple genes have been implicated in the development of PCa, few confer as high a risk as mutations in the genes associated with early-onset breast cancer (BRCA1 and BRCA2). Not only do mutations in BRCA genes increase the risk of PCa, but they have also been related to adverse disease characteristics and outcomes. Therefore, a better understanding of the association between BRCA gene mutations and PCa may provide the backdrop for individualized management of patients with PCa who are carriers of a gene mutation. Such management may include an individualized approach to screening and treatment including chemotherapeutic regimens targeted to the underlying genetic mechanism of disease. In this paper, we review the evidence relating BRCA gene mutations to the risk of PCa, as well as outcomes and response to therapy, and suggest an approach to the management of such patients.

Clinical correlation and molecular evaluation confirm that the MLH1 p.Arg182Gly (c.544A>G) mutation is pathogenic and causes Lynch syndrome.

Approximately 25 % of mismatch repair (MMR) variants are exonic nucleotide substitutions. Some result in the substitution of one amino acid for another in the protein sequence, so-called missense variants, while others are silent. The interpretation of the effect of missense and silent variants as deleterious or neutral is challenging. Pre-symptomatic testing for clinical use is not recommended for relatives of individuals with variants classified as 'of uncertain significance'. These relatives, including non-carriers, are considered at high-risk as long as the contribution of the variant to disease causation cannot be determined. This results in continuing anxiety, and the application of potentially unnecessary screening and prophylactic interventions. We encountered a large Irish Lynch syndrome kindred that carries the c.544A>G (p.Arg182Gly) alteration in the MLH1 gene and we undertook to study the variant. The clinical significance of the variant remains unresolved in the literature. Data are presented on cancer incidence within five kindreds with the same germline missense variant in the MLH1 MMR gene. Extensive testing of relevant family members in one kindred, a review of the literature, review of online MMR mutation databases and use of in silico phenotype prediction tools were undertaken to study the significance of this variant. Clinical, histological, immunohistochemical and molecular evidence from these families and other independent clinical and scientific evidence indicates that the MLH1 p.Arg182Gly (c.544A>G) change causes Lynch syndrome and supports reclassification of the variant as pathogenic.