ABSTRACT
Cascade testing for families with BRCA pathogenic variants is important to identify relatives who are carriers. These relatives can benefit from appropriate risk management and preventative strategies arising from an inherited increased risk of breast, ovarian, prostate, melanoma, and pancreatic cancers. Cascade testing has the potential to enable cost-effective cancer control even in low- and middle-income settings, but few studies have hitherto evaluated the psychosocial impact of cascade testing in an Asian population, where the cultural and religious beliefs around inheritance and destiny have previously been shown to influence perception and attitudes toward screening. In this study, we evaluated the short- and long-term psychosocial impact of genetic testing among unaffected relatives of probands identified through the Malaysian Breast Cancer Genetics Study and the Malaysian Ovarian Cancer Study, using validated questionnaires (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Cancer Worry Scale) administered at baseline, and 1-month and 2-year post-disclosure of results. Of the 305 unaffected relatives from 98 independent families who were offered cascade testing, 256 (84%) completed predictive testing and family history of cancers was the only factor significantly associated with uptake of predictive testing. We found that the levels of anxiety, depression, and cancer worry among unaffected relatives decreased significantly after result disclosure and remained low 2-year post-result disclosure. Younger relatives and relatives of Malay descent had higher cancer worry at both baseline and after result disclosure compared to those of Chinese and Indian descent, whereas relatives of Indian descent and those with family history of cancers had higher anxiety and depression levels post-result disclosure. Taken together, the results from this Asian cohort highlight the differences in psychosocial needs in different communities and inform the development of culture-specific genetic counseling strategies.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Ovarian Neoplasms , Male , Female , Humans , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Depression , Genetic Testing/methods , Anxiety , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , BRCA1 Protein/geneticsABSTRACT
With the advent of poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapies, the focus of genetic testing for breast, ovarian, and other cancers has shifted from risk management to treatment decision-making in high-resource settings. Due to the shortage of genetic counselors worldwide, alternative ways of delivering genetic counseling have been explored, including training nongenetics healthcare professionals (NGHPs) to provide genetic counseling. However, little is known about the feasibility of adopting such models in healthcare settings with insufficient specialists, where population health literacy is low and where access to new therapies may be limited. In this study, we evaluated the attitudes, considerations, and self-efficacy of oncologists, breast surgeons, and general surgeons in mainstreaming breast cancer genetic counseling in Malaysia, a middle-income Asian country with a universal healthcare system. We developed a 32-item survey via a modified Delphi method, which was then distributed via a purposive and network sampling approach. While 77% of respondents expressed interest in providing breast cancer genetic counseling, 85% preferred to refer patients directly to genetic services for genetic counseling and testing. The main considerations for mainstreaming were the cost of genetic testing and PARPi therapy, as well as the availability of support from genetics professionals. Respondents reported a lack of confidence in communicating genetic risk, particularly to patients with poor health literacy, and in the clinical management of patients with variants of uncertain significance. Our results highlight the urgent need to train more NGHPs in providing genetic counseling and testing in low-to-middle income countries, and suggest that the mainstay for genetic counseling in this setting may be for risk management rather than access to PARPi therapy.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Oncologists , Surgeons , Adenosine Diphosphate Ribose , Attitude , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genetic Counseling/methods , Genetic Testing/methods , HumansABSTRACT
There is an increasing number of cancer patients undertaking treatment-focused genetic testing despite not having a strong family history or high a priori risk of being carriers because of the decreasing cost of genetic testing and development of new therapies. There are limited studies on the psychosocial outcome of a positive result among breast cancer patients who are at low a priori risk, particularly in women of Asian descent. Breast cancer patients enrolled under the Malaysian Breast Cancer Genetic Study between October 2002 and February 2018 were tested for BRCA1, BRCA2 and PALB2 genes. All 104 carriers identified were invited by a research genetic counsellor for result disclosure. Of the 104 carriers, 64% (N = 66) had low a priori risk as determined by PENN II scores. Psychosocial, risk perception and health behaviour measures survey were conducted at baseline (pre-result disclosure), and at two to six weeks after result disclosure. At baseline, younger carriers with high a priori risk had higher Cancer Worry Scale scores than those with low a priori risk but all scores were within acceptable range. Around 75% and 55% of high a priori risk carriers as well as 80% and 67% of low a priori risk carriers had problems in the "living with cancer" and "children" psychosocial domains respectively. All carriers regardless of their a priori risk demonstrated an improved risk perception that also positively influenced their intent to undergo risk management procedures. This study has shown that with sufficient counselling and support, low a priori risk carriers are able to cope psychologically, have improved perceived risk and increased intent for positive health behaviour despite having less anticipation from a family history prior to knowing their germline carrier status.
Subject(s)
BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Fanconi Anemia Complementation Group N Protein/genetics , Genetic Counseling/psychology , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetic Variation , Humans , Malaysia , Middle Aged , Risk AssessmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Identifying patients with BRCA mutations is clinically important to inform on the potential response to treatment and for risk management of patients and their relatives. However, traditional referral routes may not meet clinical needs, and therefore, mainstreaming cancer genetics has been shown to be effective in some high-income and high health-literacy settings. To date, no study has reported on the feasibility of mainstreaming in low-income and middle-income settings, where the service considerations and health literacy could detrimentally affect the feasibility of mainstreaming. METHODS: The Mainstreaming Genetic Counselling for Ovarian Cancer Patients (MaGiC) study is a prospective, two-arm observational study comparing oncologist-led and genetics-led counselling. This study included 790 multiethnic patients with ovarian cancer from 23 sites in Malaysia. We compared the impact of different method of delivery of genetic counselling on the uptake of genetic testing and assessed the feasibility, knowledge and satisfaction of patients with ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Oncologists were satisfied with the mainstreaming experience, with 95% indicating a desire to incorporate testing into their clinical practice. The uptake of genetic testing was similar in the mainstreaming and genetics arm (80% and 79%, respectively). Patient satisfaction was high, whereas decision conflict and psychological impact were low in both arms of the study. Notably, decisional conflict, although lower than threshold, was higher for the mainstreaming group compared with the genetics arm. Overall, 13.5% of patients had a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2, and there was no difference between psychosocial measures for carriers in both arms. CONCLUSION: The MaGiC study demonstrates that mainstreaming cancer genetics is feasible in low-resource and middle-resource Asian setting and increased coverage for genetic testing.