Western health care systems are facing today increasing movement of genetic knowledge from research labs into clinical practice. This paper reports the results of a survey that addressed the confidence of primary care physicians in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks. The survey was conducted in five countries (France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK). Stratified random samples were drawn from primary care physicians in the five countries representing a sampling frame of 139,579 physicians. Stepwise binary logistic regression procedures were performed to identify the predictor variables for self-reported confidence. Three thousand six hundred eighty-six physicians participated and filled out a self-administered questionnaire. The margin of error for accurate representation of each group of European general practitioners and specialists in the total sample is 2.9% for GP, 2.8% for obstetricians/gynaecologists (OB/GYN) and for paediatricians (PAED) 2.6% (95% confidence level). Confidence in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks is low among participating primary care physicians: 44.2% are not confident, 36.5% somewhat confident, confident or very confident are 19.3%. In each country, those confident/very confident represent less than 33% of the participating physicians. Primary care physicians who report the lowest levels of confidence prove to be those least exposed to medical genetics information and training. Although there are significant differences in the way in which professional education is organised and practice is regulated across European countries, there is a need for a coordinated European effort to improve primary care physicians' background in medical genetics.

The objective of this article is to review guidelines that address counselling in the context of genetic testing in order to summarise what aspects of counselling they consider most important, and to examine how they construct the ideal of genetic counselling. Guidelines were collected by examining the websites of different international professional, political, ethical and patient organisations, either previously known or found with the help of the Google search engine, and also using references listed in other studies. The most frequently mentioned topics in the collected 56 guidelines were sought, and this was carried out with the software package Qualitative Solutions and Research for Non-numerical Unstructured Data Indexing Searching and Theorizing. Topics related to genetic counselling that were mentioned in at least 30 of 56 collected documents were considered to be the most important aspects of genetic counselling. The ideal of genetic counselling is expressed in the analysed guidelines as being composed of (1) an appropriately trained professional who understands genetics and its ethical implications well; (2) relevant and objective information; (3) assurance of the counsellee's understanding; (4) psychological support; (5) informed consent; (6) confidentiality of genetic information; (7) considering familial implications; (8) appropriate handling of potential discrimination of testing; and (9) assuring autonomous decision-making by the counsellee. The ideal of genetic counselling is rather consistent in the guidelines, but there are some contradictions between the requirements of objective information-giving and adapting counselling to counsellee's circumstances.

In this review, the national guidelines and recommendations for genetic testing for familial/hereditary breast cancer from the UK, France, the Netherlands and Germany were evaluated as to the inclusion criteria for genetic testing. In all four countries, access to genetic testing relies basically on the family history of breast and ovarian cancer. Similarities are obvious for most selection criteria. All four guidelines recommend embedding genetic testing within a framework of genetic counselling, and all agree to perform genetic testing first in an affected person. However, there are differences regarding the thresholds based on certain familial constellations, detailed description of selection criteria, the degree of relatedness between affected individuals and the counsellee, the age of diagnosis, the individual history of early onset breast cancer, bilateral breast cancer, the tumour morphology or the access to intensified surveillance. These differences and open questions not covered by the guidelines, e.g. on how to deal with phenocopies, unclassified variants, genetic variants in newly identified breast cancer susceptibility genes or with family constellations not fitting the criteria, are discussed. New evidence is usually slowly integrated into the guidelines. An exchange process towards the harmonization of the guidelines will ensure high quality health care across Europe.

No abstract

Over the past 9 years we counseled 55 couples whose unborn child was found to carry a sex chromosome polysomy. We performed a survey of postcounseling parental decisions about continuation or termination of these pregnancies. Of the 55 embryos or fetuses, 23 had the karyotype 47,XXY, 10 had 47,XYY, and 12 had 47,XXX. In addition, there were 10 instances of true mosaicism, i.e. 47,XXY/46,XY (n = 5), 47,XYY/46,XY (n = 2), or 47,XXX/46,XX (n = 3). Mean gestational age (+/-standard deviation) at diagnosis was 18.3+/-3.0 weeks. After comprehensive genetic counseling 48 (87.3%) of these pregnancies were carried to term. In seven cases (12.7%) the parents elected a pregnancy termination. Two of 31 pregnancies (6.5%) primarily ascertained at our center were aborted, whereas amongst the 24 referred cases, 5 couples (20.8%) opted for a termination. The mean gestational age of the terminated pregnancies was 19.7 weeks. The overall termination rate of 12.7% appears low in comparison with literature data. Most reports from other institutions present termination rates between 32 and 66%. The reason for the low rate of induced abortions in our study cohort is not clear. Cultural differences in parental perception of sex chromosomal polysomies may be of importance, and peculiarities of genetic counseling at our institution could also play a role. Although counseling was nondirective, we did put emphasis on providing prospective parents with information from unbiased follow-up studies of children with Klinefelter syndrome and other sex chromosome polysomies.

Genetic testing has its greatest public health value when it identifies individuals who will benefit from specific interventions based upon their risk. This paradigm is the basis for the use of predictive tests, such as BRCA1/BRCA2 testing which has become part of clinical practice for more than a decade. Currently predictive BRCA1/BRCA2 testing is offered to women using low, moderate and high risk based upon family history as cut-off levels. Non-genetic health professionals such as general practitioners (GPs) and breast surgeons (BS) are seen as gatekeepers to manage demand and/or facilitate access to appropriate services for high-risk patients. Data about current practices are lacking. The paper presents data on the current practice of GPs' and BS' cancer risk assessment, referral practices and preferred practice responsibilities for women at risk for familial breast cancer in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK derived by a self-administered questionnaire send to a representative sample of GPs and BS in the four countries. One thousand one hundred ninety-seven GPs and 1,223 BS completed the questionnaire. Both GPs and BS reported that they are consulted by a considerable number of patients presenting with concerns about a family history of cancer. Both commonalities and striking differences could be observed between GPs and BS from the four participating countries. GPs from France and Germany reported significantly higher proportions taking a family history of cancer including the extended family than GPs from the Netherlands and the UK. Most GPs from France, Germany and the Netherlands stated their willingness for providing risk assessment for an unaffected (high-risk) woman with a family history of breast cancer and the vast majority of BS from all four countries reported that they themselves would provide risk assessment for an unaffected (high-risk) woman with a family history of breast cancer. However, a substantial number of both GPs and BS would not have taken an appropriate family history for their patient failing to take into account the paternal side of the family. GPs from Germany reported a significantly lower readiness to refer a patient with a family history of a BRCA1 mutation for specialist genetic counselling when compared to the GPs from the other countries. GPs and BS from France, Germany and the Netherlands significantly less often assigned practice responsibilities to a genetic specialist as compared to the participating GPs and BS from the UK. The outcome of the study confirms the need for capability building in genetics for non-genetic health professionals. Using genetic risk assessment tools without a full understanding could result in missed opportunities for cancer prevention and harm patients. In order to provide best possible services for high-risk patients presenting with cancer concerns, close collaboration with clinical geneticists should become routine part of mainstream medical practice.

Reliable, language-independent, short screening instruments to test for cognitive function in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) remain rare, despite the high number of patients affected by cognitive decline. We developed a new, short screening instrument, the Faces Symbol Test (FST), and compared its diagnostic test characteristics with a composite of the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) and the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT), in 108 MS patients and 33 healthy controls. An Informant-Report Questionnaire, a Self-Report Questionnaire, and a neurologist's estimation of the Every Day Life Cognitive Status were also applied to the MS patients. The statistical analyses comprised of a receiver operating characteristic analysis for test accuracy and for confounding variables. The PASAT and DSST composite score estimated that 36.5% of the MS patients had cognitive impairment. The FST estimated that 40.7% of the MS patients were cognitively impaired (sensitivity 84%; specificity 85%). The FST, DSST and PASAT results were significantly correlated with the patients' physical impairment, as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). The results suggest that the FST might be a culture-free, sensitive, and practical short screening instrument for the detection of cognitive decline in patients with MS, including those in the early stages.

Treating MS is a challenge and to positively influence the course of the disease it is necessary to administer medication in a constant manner. Our data showed a moderate compliance and satisfaction with the immunomodulating medication. Adverse effects and perceived lack of treatment effect were reasons for discontinuation of therapy. To increase compliance and satisfaction with treatment, adequate information about MS, the therapeutic options, handling of medication, side-effects and their management are necessary. Additionally, realistic therapeutic aims should be discussed with the patients.