Effects of Individual and Family Functioning on Interest in Genetic Testing

Bowen, Deborah J.; Bourcier, Emily; Press, Nancy; Lewis, Frances Marcus; Burke, Wylie

doi:10.1159/000080301

Cited by 27 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…34 Prior studies have found that lower social support at the time of testing may be associated with greater risk of both short-and long-term emotional distress. 62,63 To the extent that a decision regarding genetic testing is a difficult and stressful event, the active involvement of a highly supportive family may facilitate making such a choice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Familial testicular cancer: Interest in genetic testing among high-risk family members

Peters

Vadaparampil

Kramer

et al. 2006

Genetics in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study is part of an ongoing National Cancer Institute multidisciplinary, etiologically-focused, crosssectional study of Familial Testicular Cancer (FTC). The current report targets interest in clinical genetic testing for susceptibility to FTC. Methods: Demographics, knowledge, health beliefs, and psychological and social factors were evaluated as covariates related to interest in genetic testing. Results: The majority (66%) of 229 participants (64 affected men, 66 unaffected men, and 99 women) from 47 multiple-case FTC families expressed interest in having a genetic test within 6 months, should such a test become available. Interest was similar among the three subgroups mentioned above. Worries about insurance discrimination based on genetic test results were associated with a significantly lower interest in testing. Alternatively, participants were more likely to be interested in genetic testing if they were younger and had higher levels of family support, a physician's recommendation supporting testing, cancer distress, and a need for information to inform the health care of their children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Familial testicular cancer: Interest in genetic testing among high-risk family members

Peters

Vadaparampil

Kramer

et al. 2006

Genetics in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These were reviewed in extenso. References [19,34,46,47,58,59,64,68,69,73,74,77,78] were combined by two or three when they were from the same center with the same target group, as indicated in the tables. Reference [79] provided background statistical data about Israel.…”

Section: Methods: Data Sources and Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening of high-risk groups for breast and ovarian cancer in Europe: a focus on the Jewish population

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low breast cancer screening rates are often found among ethnic minority groups and those born outside the host country. This is of particular concern for high-risk groups, who should benefit from ongoing trials aimed at optimizing screening strategies for breast, as well as ovarian cancer. Both of these issues are germane for Jewish women in Europe. We systematically review the literature concerning breast cancer early detection practices (BCEDP) among Jewish women, and examine European surveillance studies of high-risk for breast and/or ovarian cancer that had imaging in the surveillance protocol, in order to assess the likelihood of adequately including women from minority ethnic groups. No studies were found about BCEDP among Jewish women in Europe. Twenty-one research groups from Israel or the US addressed BCEDP among Jewish women. Some Jewish women in the US and Israel, including recent immigrants, are under-screened. Twenty-four research groups reported imaging surveillance of women at increased risk for breast and/or ovarian cancer in Europe. There was a clear benefit to magnetic resonance imaging and/or more intensive screening for women with increased breast cancer risk. Some of these surveillance studies considered ethnic minority groups at high risk, including Jewish women, but none provided adequate outreach to ensure that these groups were included in their programs. The specific screening needs of Jewish and other high-risk ethnic minority groups in Europe have not been met regarding breast and ovarian cancer. A European-wide, population-based approach is suggested, with cultural sensitivity being vital for these efforts.

show abstract

“…46 Frequency of communication with all listed first-and second-degree relatives was rated on a 4-point Likert scale, from 1 (not at all) to 4 (a lot). An option for ''I do not have a family member of this type or they are not living'' was provided.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The KinFact Intervention – A Randomized Controlled Trial to Increase Family Communication About Cancer History

Bodurtha

McClish

Gyure

et al. 2014

Journal of Women's Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Knowing family history is important for understanding cancer risk, yet communication within families is suboptimal. Providing strategies to enhance communication may be useful. Methods: Four hundred ninety women were recruited from urban, safety-net, hospital-based primary care women's health clinics. Participants were randomized to receive the KinFact intervention or the control handout on lowering risks for breast/colon cancer and screening recommendations. Cancer family history was reviewed with all participants. The 20-minute KinFact intervention, based in communication and behavior theory, included reviewing individualized breast/colon cancer risks and an interactive presentation about cancer and communication. Study outcomes included whether participants reported collecting family history, shared cancer risk information with relatives, and the frequency of communication with relatives. Data were collected at baseline, 1, 6, and 14 months. Results: Overall, intervention participants were significantly more likely to gather family cancer information at follow-up (odds ratio [OR]: 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01, 3.71) and to share familial cancer information with relatives (OR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.37, 2.48). Communication frequency (1 = not at all; 4 = a lot) was significantly increased at follow-up (1.67 vs. 1.54). Differences were not modified by age, race, education, or family history. However, effects were modified by pregnancy status and genetic literacy. Intervention effects for information gathering and frequency were observed for nonpregnant women but not for pregnant women. Additionally, intervention effects were observed for information gathering in women with high genetic literacy, but not in women with low genetic literacy. Conclusions: The KinFact intervention successfully promoted family communication about cancer risk. Educating women to enhance their communication skills surrounding family history may allow them to partner more effectively with their families and ultimately their providers in discussing risks and prevention.

show abstract

Effects of Individual and Family Functioning on Interest in Genetic Testing

Cited by 27 publications

References 26 publications

Familial testicular cancer: Interest in genetic testing among high-risk family members

Familial testicular cancer: Interest in genetic testing among high-risk family members

Screening of high-risk groups for breast and ovarian cancer in Europe: a focus on the Jewish population

The KinFact Intervention – A Randomized Controlled Trial to Increase Family Communication About Cancer History

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About