Psychological distress and uterine fibroids: a bidirectional two-sample mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Observational data indicates a connection between emotional discomfort, such as anxiety and depression, and uterine fibroids (UFs). However, additional investigation is required to establish the causal relationship between them. Hence, we assessed the reciprocal causality between four psychological disorders and UFs utilizing two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR). METHODS: To evaluate the causal relationship between four types of psychological distress (depressive symptoms, severe depression, anxiety or panic attacks, mood swings) and UFs, bidirectional two-sample MR was employed, utilizing single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with these conditions. Both univariate MR (UVMR) and multivariate MR (MVMR) primarily applied inverse variance weighted (IVW) as the method for estimating potential causal effects. Complementary approaches such as MR Egger, weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode were utilized to validate the findings. To assess the robustness of our MR results, we conducted sensitivity analyses using Cochran's Q-test and the MR Egger intercept test. RESULTS: The results of our UVMR analysis suggest that genetic predispositions to depressive symptoms (Odds Ratio [OR] = 1.563, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.209-2.021, P = 0.001) and major depressive disorder (MDD) (OR = 1.176, 95% CI = 1.044-1.324, P = 0.007) are associated with an increased risk of UFs. Moreover, the IVW model showed a nominally significant positive correlation between mood swings (OR: 1.578; 95% CI: 1.062-2.345; P = 0.024) and UFs risk. However, our analysis did not establish a causal relationship between UFs and the four types of psychological distress. Even after adjusting for confounders like body mass index (BMI), smoking, alcohol consumption, and number of live births in the MVMR, the causal link between MDD and UFs remained significant (OR = 1.217, 95% CI = 1.039-1.425, P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Our study presents evidence supporting the causal relationship between genetic susceptibility to MDD and the incidence of UFs. These findings highlight the significance of addressing psychological health issues, particularly depression, in both the prevention and treatment of UFs.

The role of loneliness and social isolation in mediating the relationship between childhood maltreatment and schizophrenia: A genetically informed approach.

Observational studies have found loneliness and social isolation to mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and schizophrenia. Limitations with observational studies (e.g., confounding and reverse causation), however, have meant the robustness of these relationships has thus far not been explored. To address this gap, the current study utilized genomic structural equation modeling (genomic SEM) and Mendelian randomization (MR) to perform a genetic mediation analysis between childhood maltreatment, loneliness/isolation, and schizophrenia, using summary statistics from three genome-wide association studies (sample sizes 105,318-487,647). While we observed a putative effect of both childhood maltreatment (inverse variance weighted OR = 3.44 per standard deviation increase, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.66-7.13], p < .001) and loneliness/isolation (OR = 2.98, 95% CI [1.37-6.46], p = .006) on schizophrenia, our hypothesis that loneliness/isolation would mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and schizophrenia was not supported (genomic SEM indirect effect = -0.05, SE = 0.05, p = .255; MR indirect effect = 0.10, SE = 0.11, p = .369). Furthermore, reverse mediation analysis indicated that the effect may be in the opposite direction (genomic SEM indirect effect = 0.11, SE = 0.02, p < .001; MR indirect effect = 0.01, SE = 0.00, p < .001), accounting for 20.3%-28.9% of the total effect. The current results suggest that intervening in loneliness/isolation in individuals with a history of childhood maltreatment is unlikely to reduce schizophrenia risk. On the contrary, targeting loneliness/isolation in individuals with a genetic predisposition toward schizophrenia may diminish childhood maltreatment risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Men with metastatic prostate cancer carrying a pathogenic germline variant in breast cancer genes: disclosure of genetic test results to relatives.

Some patients with metastatic prostate cancer carry a pathogenic germline variant (PV) in a gene, that is mainly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in women. If they test positive for such a PV, prostate cancer patients are encouraged to disclose the genetic test result to relatives who are at risk in case the carrier status changes the relatives' medical care. Our study aimed to investigate how men who learned they carry a PV in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2 or ATM disclosed their carrier status to at-risk relatives and to assess the possible psychological burden for the carrier and their perception of the burden for relatives. In total, 23 men with metastatic prostate cancer carrying a PV completed the IRI questionnaire about family communication; 14 also participated in a semi-structured interview. Patients felt highly confident in discussing the genetic test result with relatives. The diagnosis of prostate cancer was experienced as a burden, whereas being informed about genetic testing results did in most cases not add to this burden. Two patients encountered negative experiences with family communication, as they considered the genetic test result to be more urgent than their relatives. This mixed-methods study shows that metastatic prostate cancer patients with a PV in genes mainly associated with increased risk of breast cancer feel well-equipped to communicate about this predisposition in their families. Carriers felt motivated to disclose their genetic test result to relatives. Most of them indicated that the disclosure was not experienced as a psychological burden.

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.

Psychosocial barriers and facilitators for cascade genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a scoping review.

Despite increased awareness and availability of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome for over 20 years, there is still significant underuse of cascade genetic testing among at-risk relatives. This scoping review synthesized evidence regarding psychosocial barriers and facilitators of family communication and/or uptake of cascade genetic testing in relatives from HBOC families. Search terms included 'hereditary breast and ovarian cancer' and 'cascade genetic testing' for studies published from 2012-2022. Through searching common databases, and manual search of references, 480 studies were identified after excluding duplications. Each article was reviewed by two researchers independently and 20 studies were included in the final analysis. CASP, RoBANS 2.0, RoB 2.0, and MMAT were used to assess the quality of included studies. A convergent data synthesis method was used to integrate evidence from quantitative and narrative data into categories and subcategories. Evidence points to 3 categories and 12 subcategories of psychosocial barriers and facilitators for cascade testing: (1) facilitators (belief in health protection and prevention; family closeness; decisional empowerment; family support, sense of responsibility; self-efficacy; supportive health professionals); (2) bidirectional concepts (information; perception of genetic/cancer consequences; negative emotions and attitude); and (3) barriers (negative reactions from family and negative family dynamics). Healthcare providers need to systematically evaluate these psychosocial factors, strengthen facilitators and alleviate barriers to promote informed decision-making for communication of genetic test results and uptake of genetic testing. Bidirectional factors merit special consideration and tailored approaches, as they can potentially have a positive or negative influence on family communication and uptake of genetic testing.

Understanding Social, Cultural, and Religious Factors Influencing Medical Decision-Making on BRCA1/2 Genetic Testing in the Orthodox Jewish Community.

INTRODUCTION: Although the prevalence of a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is about 1:400 (0.25%) in the general population, the prevalence is as high as 1:40 (2.5%) among the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Despite cost-effective preventive measures for mutation carriers, Orthodox Jews constitute a cultural and religious group that requires different approaches to BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing relative to other groups. This study analyzed a dialog of key stakeholders and community members to explore factors that influence decision-making about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in the New York Orthodox Jewish community. METHODS: Qualitative research methods, based on Grounded Theory and Narrative Research, were utilized to analyze the narrative data collected from 49 key stakeholders and community members. A content analysis was conducted to identify themes; inter-rater reliability was 71%. RESULTS: Facilitators of genetic testing were a desire for preventive interventions and education, while barriers to genetic testing included negative emotions, feared impact on family/romantic relationships, cost, and stigma. Views differed on the role of religious leaders and healthcare professionals in medical decision-making. Education, health, and community were discussed as influential factors, and concerns were expressed about disclosure, implementation, and information needs. CONCLUSION: This study elicited the opinions of Orthodox Jewish women (decision-makers) and key stakeholders (influencers) who play critical roles in the medical decision-making process. The findings have broad implications for engaging community stakeholders within faith-based or culturally distinct groups to ensure better utilization of healthcare services for cancer screening and prevention designed to improve population health.

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).

Patient-reported anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing cancer genetic risk information with family members.

While prior studies have largely focused on family communication of diagnostic single-gene test results or specific types of cancer testing results, far less work has investigated family communication of cancer-related genetic results that include multi-gene panels, a broad array of cancer types/stages, and participants without family history of cancer. The study we report here examined individuals' anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing genetic information with family members. An 80+ gene panel was performed on participants recruited from Mayo Clinic, diagnosed with different cancer types, who did not have a family history suggestive of an inherited risk. Participants completed a 49-item survey before receiving genetic test results. Family variant testing was provided to family members at no cost, allowing factors influencing intent to share to be examined in the absence of financial burdens. In all, 1721 of 2984 individuals who received genetic testing completed the survey (57.7% completion rate). Participants' intent to share with parents, siblings, and children was inversely related to the number of anticipated barriers to sharing and directly related to the number of anticipated benefits to sharing. Of those participants who did not intend to share with parents, siblings, and adult children, 64.8%, 30.3%, and 67.6% reported that there were no barriers, while 17.1%, 24.5%, and 40.2.% reported there were no benefits. Findings indicate that barriers to sharing genetic information with family members vary across family member types, and an inability to identify at least one benefit of sharing with family members is a predictor of intent not to share.

Why do people seek out polygenic risk scores for complex disorders, and how do they understand and react to results?

We sought to explore individuals' motivations for using their direct-to-consumer genetic testing data to generate polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using a not-for-profit third-party tool, and to assess understanding of, and reaction to their results. Using a cross-sectional design, users of Impute.me who had already accessed PRS results were invited to complete an online questionnaire asking about demographics, motivations for seeking PRSs, understanding and interpretation of PRSs, and two validated scales regarding reactions to results-the Impact of Event Scale Revised (IES-R) and the Feelings About genomiC Testing Results (FACToR). Independent samples T-tests and ANOVA were used to explore associations between the variables. 227 individuals participated in the study. The most frequently reported motivation was general curiosity (98.2%). Only 25.6% of participants correctly answered all questions assessing understanding/interpretation of PRSs. Over half of participants (60.8%) experienced a negative reaction (upset, anxious, and/or sad on FACToR scale) after receiving their PRSs and 5.3% scored over the threshold for potential post-traumatic stress disorder on the IES-R. Lower understanding about PRS was associated with experiencing a negative psychological reaction (P values <0.001). Higher quality pre-test information, particularly to improve understanding, and manage expectations for PRS may be useful in limiting negative psychological reactions.

Psychosocial Effect of Newborn Genomic Sequencing on Families in the BabySeq Project: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) may provide health benefits throughout the life span, but there are concerns that it could also have an unfavorable (ie, negative) psychosocial effect on families. Objective: To assess the psychosocial effect of nGS on families from the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of nGS on the clinical care of newborns from well-baby nurseries and intensive care units. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted from May 14, 2015, to May 21, 2019, at well-baby nurseries and intensive care units at 3 Boston, Massachusetts, area hospitals, 519 parents of 325 infants completed surveys at enrollment, immediately after disclosure of nGS results, and 3 and 10 months after results disclosure. Statistical analysis was performed on a per-protocol basis from January 16, 2019, to December 1, 2019. Intervention: Newborns were randomized to receive either standard newborn screening and a family history report (control group) or the same plus an nGS report of childhood-onset conditions and highly actionable adult-onset conditions (nGS group). Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean responses were compared between groups and, within the nGS group, between parents of children who received a monogenic disease risk finding and those who did not in 3 domains of psychosocial impact: parent-child relationship (Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale), parents' relationship (Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale), and parents' psychological distress (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale). Results: A total of 519 parents (275 women [53.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [4.5] years) were included in this study. Although mean scores differed for some outcomes at singular time points, generalized estimating equations models did not show meaningful differences in parent-child relationship (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale scores: postdisclosure, 0.04 [0.15]; 3 months, -0.18 [0.18]; 10 months, -0.07 [0.20]; joint P = .57) or parents' psychological distress (between-group ratio of adjusted mean [SE] Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores: postdisclosure, 1.04 [0.08]; 3 months, 1.07 [0.11]; joint P = .80) response patterns between study groups over time for any measures analyzed in these 2 domains. Response patterns on one parents' relationship measure differed between groups over time (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale scores: postdisclosure, -0.19 [0.07]; 3 months, -0.04 [0.07]; and 10 months, -0.01 [0.08]; joint P = .02), but the effect decreased over time and no difference was observed on the conflict measure responses over time. We found no evidence of persistent negative psychosocial effect in any domain. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of nGS, there was no persistent negative psychosocial effect on families among those who received nGS nor among those who received a monogenic disease risk finding for their infant. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511.

Young people's moral attitudes and motivations towards direct-to-consumer genetic testing for inherited risk of Alzheimer disease.

PURPOSE: Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved sales of genetic tests for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk, a heated debate has arisen over whether these tests should indeed be offered online and direct-to-consumer (DTC). As this debate progresses, it is important to understand the ethical perspectives and motivations of young people, who are a key target group for DTC services. METHODS: Thirty-one grandchildren of people with LOAD, aged 16-26, were interviewed about their moral attitudes and motivations with regards to DTC genetic testing for LOAD. RESULTS: Even though most participants claimed that people should have the right to access these services, they also expressed concerns about potential distress in response to learning about risk, particularly for minors. About a third were interested in testing, primarily to gain self-knowledge regarding one's health; however, face-to-face services were vastly preferred over the online option. CONCLUSION: While DTC genetic companies often market their services as a "fun consumer product", DTC testing for LOAD was largely understood as a serious health screening procedure and a vulnerable moment in the lives of young people in Alzheimer's families. This points to the importance of appropriate standards of information and support to young people pre- and post-testing.

Incidental findings in a series of 2500 gene panel tests for a genetic predisposition to cancer: Results and impact on patients.

With next generation sequencing, physicians are faced with more complex and uncertain data, particularly incidental findings (IF). Guidelines for the return of IF have been published by learned societies. However, little is known about how patients are affected by these results in a context of oncogenetic testing. Over 4 years, 2500 patients with an indication for genetic testing underwent a gene cancer panel. If an IF was detected, patients were contacted by a physician/genetic counsellor and invited to take part in a semi-structured interview to assess their understanding of the result, the change in medical care, the psychological impact, and the transmission of results to the family. Fourteen patients (0.56%) were delivered an IF in a cancer predisposition gene (RAD51C, PMS2, SDHC, RET, BRCA2, CHEK2, CDKN2A, CDH1, SUFU). Two patients did not collect the results and another two died before the return of results. Within the 10 patients recontacted, most of them reported surprise at the delivery of IF, but not anxiety. The majority felt they had chosen to obtain the result and enough information to understand it. They all initiated the recommended follow-up and did not regret the procedure. Information regarding the IF was transmitted to their offspring but siblings or second-degree relatives were not consistently informed. No major adverse psychological events were found in our experience. IF will be inherent to the development of sequencing, even for restricted gene panels, so it is important to increase our knowledge on the impact of such results in different contexts.

Parental monitoring for type 1 diabetes in genetically at-risk young children: The TEDDY study.

OBJECTIVE: We examined parental diabetes monitoring behaviors in a cohort of children at increased genetic risk for type 1 diabetes. We hypothesized that being informed of a positive islet autoantibody (IA) would increase monitoring behaviors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study follows 8676 children with high-risk human leucocyte antigen-DQ genotypes from birth to age 15, including general population (GP) children and those with a first-degree relative (FDR) with diabetes. Data on parental monitoring behaviors were solicited yearly. Serum samples were tested for IA and parents were informed of child results. We examined parental monitoring behaviors during the first 7 years of TEDDY. RESULTS: In IA- children, the most common monitoring behavior was participating in TEDDY study tasks; up to 49.8% and 44.2% of mothers and fathers, respectively, reported this. Among FDRs, 7%-10% reported watching for diabetes symptoms and 7%-9% reported monitoring the child's glucose, for mothers and fathers, respectively. After IA+ notification, all monitoring behaviors significantly increased in GP parents; only glucose monitoring increased in FDR parents and these behaviors continued for up to 4 years. FDR status, accurate diabetes risk perception, and anxiety were associated with glucose monitoring in IA+ and IA- cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Many parents view TEDDY participation as a way to monitor for type 1 diabetes, a benefit of enrollment in a longitudinal study with no prevention offered. IA+ notification increases short- and long-term monitoring behaviors. For IA- and IA+ children, FDR parents engage in glucose monitoring, even when not instructed to do so.

Influential Factors on Risk-reduction Mastectomy in a High-risk Breast Cancer Population With Genetic Predispositions.

BACKGROUND: Carriers of deleterious mutations in breast cancer predisposition genes are presented with critical choices regarding cancer risk management. Risk-reduction mastectomy is a major preventative strategy in this population. Understanding the decision-making process for prophylactic mastectomy is essential in patient-centered care for high-risk carriers and patients with breast cancer. We sought to provide insight into influential factors underlying preventative surgery decisions among individuals with high breast cancer risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of pathogenic carriers of high-risk breast cancer genes who presented to the Moffitt GeneHome clinic between March 2017 and June 2020. Associations between preventative mastectomy choice and influence variables were analyzed via unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 258 high-risk mutation carriers, 104 (40.3%) underwent risk-reduction mastectomy. A significantly higher proportion of mastectomy patients reported prior history of breast cancer (68.9% vs. 16.5%; P < .001) and history of other risk-reduction or noncancer-related surgeries (61.7% vs. 25.8%; P < .001). Significant predictors affecting surgery decision included previous breast cancer history (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 10.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.59-19.63; P < .0001), other risk-reduction or noncancer-related surgical history (aOR, 4.65; 95% CI, 2.28-9.47; P < .0001), and age at presentation to the genetics clinic (< 35 years old: aOR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.04-7.4; P = .042; 35-55 years old: aOR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.19-5.18; P = .016). CONCLUSIONS: Preventive mastectomy decisions are highly personal and complex. In our sample, we observed prior history or concurrent breast cancer, history of other risk-reduction surgery or noncancer-related surgery, and younger age at presentation to the GeneHome clinic to be predictive of mastectomy uptake.

The Psychiatric Genetic Data of Children in Proceedings to Terminate Parental Rights.

The introduction of psychiatric genetic evidence in court proceedings to terminate parental rights raises concerns that such information will result in misconceived assumptions about the child's mental health trajectory and unjust rulings on termination of parental rights. We conducted an online vignette-based survey with a nationally representative sample of adults from the general public (n = 300 respondents) to assess their views on how evidence about a child's psychiatric genetic makeup may affect key decisions in termination proceedings. Our findings indicate that genetic evidence increased the child's labeling as having a psychiatric disorder, regardless of the presence of symptoms, treatment recommendations, evaluation of prescription medication, and beliefs in treatment efficacy. Genetic evidence alone did not affect whether participants would terminate parental rights, but participants who thought that the child did not have a psychiatric disorder were more likely to terminate in the presence of genetic test results. We conclude that psychiatric genetic evidence in termination proceedings may have unintended consequences, and that measures should be taken to ensure that it does not unfairly affect outcomes.

Priority of Risk (But Not Perceived Magnitude of Risk) Predicts Improved Sun-Protection Behavior Following Genetic Counseling for Familial Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Understanding multiple components of risk perceptions is important because perceived risk predicts engagement in prevention behaviors. PURPOSE: To examine how multiple components of risk perceptions (perceived magnitude of and worry about risk, prioritization of the management of one's risk) changed following genetic counseling with or without test reporting, and to examine which of these components prospectively predicted improvements in sun-protection behavior 1 year later. METHODS: A prospective, nonrandomized study design was used. Participants were 114 unaffected members of melanoma-prone families who (i) underwent genetic testing for a CDKN2A/p16 mutation (n = 69) or (ii) were at comparably elevated risk based on family history and underwent genetic counseling but not testing (no-test controls, n = 45). Participants reported risk perception components and sun-protection behavior at baseline, immediately following counseling, and 1 month and 1 year after counseling. RESULTS: Factor analysis indicated three risk components. Carriers reported increased perceived magnitude and priority of risk, but not cancer worry. No-test controls showed no changes in any risk perception. Among noncarriers, priority of risk remained high at all assessments, whereas magnitude of risk and cancer worry decreased. Of the three risk components, greater priority of risk uniquely predicted improved self-reported sun protection 1 year post-counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Priority of risk (i) seems to be a component of risk perceptions distinguishable from magnitude of risk and cancer worry, (ii) may be an important predictor of daily prevention behavior, and (iii) remained elevated 1 year following genetic counseling only for participants who received a positive melanoma genetic test result.

Experiences of BRCA1/2 Gene Mutation-Positive Women With Cancer in Communicating Genetic Risk to Their Relatives.

BACKGROUND: When a woman is diagnosed with hereditary breast or ovarian cancer, family members may be at high risk of cancers associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutation and benefit from disclosure of the genetic test result. This duty of informing relatives may be distressing, or relatives may not be properly informed. OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively describe breast cancer patients' experiences communicating genetic risk of cancer to their relatives. METHODS: Probands with BRCA1/2 gene mutations were recruited from an oncology institute in Istanbul, Turkey, and interviewed by telephone. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to derive central elements of the 30 women's experiences communicating genetic risk to their relatives. RESULTS: Six themes were identified: response to genetic test results, reason for communication, feelings about communication, reflection after communication, results of communication, and needs. CONCLUSION: Women with cancer found to have BRCA1/2 gene mutations tended to share their genetic test results within the family. The main motives for sharing test results were the desire to encourage relatives to get tested and moral and ethical convictions. Women needed explicit information regarding cancer risk and risk-reducing strategies to act upon. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The women's feelings and reflections about the communication process were varied and suggest that personalized genetic risk communication interventions may better support women with BRCA1/2 gene mutations during and after communication with relatives. Long-term follow-up of those women is essential because of the need for informed decision on risk-reducing strategies.

Proof of Concept of a Personalized Genetic Risk Tool to Promote Smoking Cessation: High Acceptability and Reduced Cigarette Smoking.

Relatively little is known about the possible effects of personalized genetic risk information on smoking, the leading preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. We examined the acceptability and potential behavior change associated with a personalized genetically informed risk tool (RiskProfile) among current smokers. Current smokers (n = 108) were enrolled in a pre-post study with three visits. At visit 1, participants completed a baseline assessment and genetic testing via 23andMe. Participants' raw genetic data (CHRNA5 variants) and smoking heaviness were used to create a tailored RiskProfile tool that communicated personalized risks of smoking-related diseases and evidence-based recommendations to promote cessation. Participants received their personalized RiskProfile intervention at visit 2, approximately 6 weeks later. Visit 3 involved a telephone-based follow-up assessment 30 days after intervention. Of enrolled participants, 83% were retained across the three visits. Immediately following intervention, acceptability of RiskProfile was high (M = 4.4; SD = 0.6 on scale of 1 to 5); at 30-day follow-up, 89% of participants demonstrated accurate recall of key intervention messages. In the full analysis set of this single-arm trial, cigarettes smoked per day decreased from intervention to 30-day follow-up [11.3 vs. 9.8; difference = 1.5; 95% confidence interval (0.6-2.4); P = 0.001]. A personalized genetically informed risk tool was found to be highly acceptable and associated with a reduction in smoking, although the absence of a control group must be addressed in future research. This study demonstrates proof of concept for translating key basic science findings into a genetically informed risk tool that was used to promote progress toward smoking cessation.Prevention Relevance: This study demonstrates that personal genetic information can be incorporated into a risk feedback tool that was highly acceptable to current smokers and associated with reductions in smoking. These findings may pave the way for effectiveness and implementation research on genetically-informed behavior change interventions to enhance cancer prevention efforts.

Informing about genetic risk in families with Huntington disease: comparison of attitudes across two decades.

The low uptake of presymptomatic testing in Huntington disease prompted us to question family members on how they handle the transmission of information regarding genetic risk. We hypothesised that in 2019, parents would inform their at-risk children about their genetic risk more and at a younger age than in 2000, given the availability of prenatal diagnosis, French legislation changes since 2011, and recent therapeutic advances. We made a questionnaire available about the transmission of genetic information within families with Huntington disease in 2000 and 2019. We obtained 443 questionnaires (295 in 2019 and 148 in 2000). Participants were mainly at-risk for Huntington disease (n = 113), affected (n = 85), and spouses (n = 154). In 2019, participants had a higher mean education level (p < 0.01) and a mean age of 44.1 ± 15.1 years (vs 48.1 ± 11.4 years in 2000, p < 0.01). They had been informed about the risk of being a carrier at around 30 years of age (29.0 ± 14.2 in 2019 vs 32.2 ± 13.8 in 2000, p = 0.09). However, they would inform at an earlier age (≤18 years, 67% vs 59%, p = 0.16). Information on transmission risk had been given primarily by parents (45% vs 30%, p = 0.06). In addition, genetic testing for relatives unaware of their status was recommended more frequently in 2019 (46% vs 32%, p < 0.001). Respondents in 2019 recommended genetic testing more often but overall attitudes towards information and testing have not changed significantly over the 19-year time period since the questionnaire was first delivered even despite recent clinical trials potential disease modifying therapies.