PurposeReducing ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure may decrease melanoma risk in the hereditary melanoma setting. It is unknown whether genetic counseling and test reporting of CDKN2A/p16 mutation status promote long-term compliance with photoprotection recommendations, especially in unaffected mutation carriers.MethodsThis study evaluated changes 2 years following melanoma genetic testing in self-reported practice of sun-protection (sunscreen, photoprotective clothing, UVR avoidance) among 37 members of two CDKN2A/p16 kindreds (10 unaffected carriers, 11 affected carriers, 16 unaffected noncarriers; response rate=64.9% of eligible participants).ResultsMultivariate profile analysis indicated that all 3 participant groups reported increased daily routine practice of sun-protection 2 years following melanoma genetic testing (p<.02), with 96.9% reporting that at least 1 sun-protection behavior was part of their daily routine, up from 78.1% at baseline (p<.015). Unaffected carriers (p<.024) and unaffected noncarriers (p<.027) reported significantly more frequent use of photoprotective clothing. Affected carriers maintained adherence to all sun-protection behaviors. Reported sunburns in the past 6 months decreased significantly (p<.018).ConclusionMembers of high-risk families reported increased daily routine sun-protection and decreased sunburns 2 years following melanoma genetic testing, with no net decline in sun-protection following negative test results. Thus, genetic testing and counseling may motivate sustained improvements in prevention behaviors.

No abstract

Identifying new methods to deliver cancer genetic counseling (GC) are needed to meet the growing interest in BRCA1/2 testing. The goal of this pilot feasibility study was designed to test the initial acceptability of group GC on selected patient outcomes (satisfaction, distress, perceived control) in a breast/ovarian cancer genetics clinic setting. Sixty-five participants at increased risk for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC) agreed to participate in self-selected individual or group GC appointments. Forty-nine participants completed all study questionnaires and were included in the analyses. There were significant improvements for participants in both the individual and group GC formats with regard to perceived personal control, general psychological distress and cancer-specific psychological distress scores. Participants in both the individual and group formats reported high satisfaction scores on the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale. Study results suggest that group GC may be feasible and acceptable to high-risk women.

It is unknown whether or why genetic test reporting confers benefits in the understanding and management of cancer risk beyond what patients learn from counseling based on family history. A prospective nonexperimental control group study compared participants from melanoma-prone families who underwent CDKN2A/p16 (p16) genetic testing (27 carriers, 38 noncarriers) to participants from equivalently melanoma-prone families known not to carry a deleterious p16 mutation (31 no-test controls). All participants received equivalent counseling concerning elevated lifetime melanoma risk and corresponding recommendations for prevention and screening. Both immediately and one month after counseling, participants receiving a genetic test result reported greater understanding of their risk, decreased derogation of the risk information, and greater personal applicability of prevention recommendations than no-test controls. Decreased derogation of risk information after test reporting predicted further increases in understanding of melanoma risk and applicability of prevention recommendations one month later. Results suggest unique benefits of genetic test reporting in promoting understanding and acceptance of information about hereditary cancer risk and its management.

BACKGROUND Certain primary hepatic tumors have been associated with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a condition caused by germline mutations of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene. However, a genetic association between FAP and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been shown. This study tested the hypothesis that biallelic inactivation of the APC gene contributed to the development of HCC in a patient with FAP and a known germline mutation of the APC gene at codon 208, but no other risk factors for HCC. METHODS Total RNA and genomic DNA were isolated from the tumor, and in vitro synthesized protein assay and DNA sequencing analysis were used to screen for a somatic mutation in the APC gene. RESULTS A somatic one–base pair deletion at codon 568 was identified in the wild‐type allele of the APC gene. CONCLUSIONS To the authors' knowledge, this study provides the first evidence that biallelic inactivation of the APC gene may contribute to the development of HCC in patients with FAP. Cancer 2001;92:332–9. © 2001 American Cancer Society.