Factors influencing the decision to share cancer genetic results among family members: An in‐depth interview study of women in an Asian setting

Abstract

Facilitators and barriers for result sharing are similar to those among Western women. A framework to explain Asian patients' decision-making process identifies optimal counselling opportunities to enhance communication with family.

Effect of reminiscence therapy based on positive psychology theory (RTBPPT) on the positive feelings of the spousal caregivers of elderly patients with advanced cancer in China

“…This finding is echoed by (Laver et al., 2016). Third, in our RT programme, the facilitator provided the caregivers with emotional support by showing them undivided attention, respect and empathy during the interventions (Jani, Simpson, Lawrence, Simpson, & Mercer, 2018; Li et al., 2018). The RT programme helped the caregiver evoke memories of the assistance received from family members, friends, colleagues and the community.…”

Exploring relatives’ perceptions of participation, ethics, and communication in a patient‐driven study for hereditary cancer variant reclassification

“…Communication of cancer genetic risk information within families can depend on a number of factors, including the perceived disease risk of a genetic variant, the relationship between the giver and recipient of information, cultural expectations of family relationships, and the anticipated psychosocial consequences of giving or receiving a genetic test result (Behavioral Working Group of the Colon Cancer Family Registry et al, ; Claes et al, ; Forrest et al, ; Harris et al, ; Li et al, ; Stoffel et al, ; Vos et al, ). Previous studies have suggested that first‐ and second‐degree relatives are more likely to receive information than more distantly related relatives due to differing degrees of emotional closeness and logistical issues such as availability of contact information (Forrest et al, ; Stoffel et al, ).…”

“…Female relatives are more likely to receive information than male relatives, particularly for genetic information associated with ‘female’ diseases like breast and ovarian cancer (Daly, Montgomery, Bingler, & Ruth, ; Hallowell et al, ; MacDonald et al, ; Patenaude et al, ; Wilson et al, ). Personal pre‐judgments about the timing and emotional impact of information disclosure, as well as the recipient's anticipated understanding of genetic test results, can also affect communication, particularly in a parent–child relationship (Bowen, Hay, Harris‐Wai, Meischke, & Burke, ; Hallowell et al, ; Li et al, ; Patenaude et al, ).…”

“…While several studies focus on the communication of genetic risk information with respect to pathogenic variants, few specifically address communication about variants of uncertain significance (VUS) or about inconclusive negative results, defined as a negative result which still leaves a personal or family history of cancer unexplained. Li et al () described a cohort of Asian women who did not proactively share VUS results with family so as to prevent confusion and panic. Similarly, Hughes et al () and Patenaude et al () found that women tested for BRCA1/2 were less likely to share inconclusive results and VUS with sisters compared to positive results about a pathogenic variant.…”

Impact of free cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing on uptake in Singapore

“…The demand for clinical genetics services in Singapore has increased dramatically, 17 despite studies identifying persisting concerns in the community related to the potential for stigma and burden associated with heritable conditions. 23,27,30 The cost of genetic testing for patients in Singapore remains out-of-pocket, and any available subsidies are usually sourced from finite philanthropic donations or research grants. A previous study of probands attending the Cancer Genetics Service (CGS) at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) found that the provision of subsidies resulted in a significant increase in uptake of genetic testing.…”