Search

We report previously undocumented evidence of genetic discrimination by Australian insurance companies, obtained through direct consumer reports. We surveyed 174 consumers with cancer-predisposing variants, recruited by cancer organisations Lynch Syndrome Australia and Pink Hope. Questions related to experiences accessing risk-rated insurance after genetic testing. Results indicate that both legal (permitted under current regulation) and illegal discrimination is occurring. Although some respondents had not applied for risk-rated insurance, or had insurance in place before genetic testing (n = 100), those seeking new policies (n = 74) commonly experienced difficulties obtaining insurance (86%, 64/74). Of those experiencing difficulties, 50% (32/64) had no prior history or symptoms of cancer, and had undertaken risk reduction through surveillance and/or preventative surgery. Seventy-seven percent (49/64) reported difficulties related to life insurance. Follow-up telephone interviews with four respondents further described cases of apparent illegal breaches. All reports of discrimination identified were, to our knowledge, previously unreported in the literature. The number of cases suggests a systemic problem with the Australian life insurance industry. We support calls for government oversight of the inherently conflicted model of industry self-regulation in Australia, and an immediate ban on the use of genetic test results in insurance underwriting.

Background: This study investigated whether receiving the results of predictive genetic testing for Lynch syndrome, indicating the presence or absence of an inherited predisposition to various cancers, including colorectal cancer, was associated with change in individual colonoscopy and smoking behaviors, which could prevent colorectal cancer., Methods: The study population included individuals with no previous diagnosis of colorectal cancer, whose families had already identified deleterious mutations in the mismatch repair or EPCAM genes. Hypotheses were generated from a simple health economics model and tested against individual-level panel data from the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry., Results: The empirical analysis revealed evidence consistent with some of the hypotheses, with a higher likelihood of undergoing colonoscopy in those who discovered their genetic predisposition to colorectal cancer and a lower likelihood of quitting smoking in those who discovered their lack thereof., Conclusions: Predictive genetic information about Lynch syndrome was associated with change in individual colonoscopy and smoking behaviors but not necessarily in ways to improve population health., Impact: The study findings suggest that the impact of personalized medicine on disease prevention is intricate, warranting further analyses to determine the net benefits and costs. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(11); 1524-33. ©2016 AACR., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (©2016 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Objective: Genetic testing for hereditary cancer susceptibility syndromes is a family-centered process. Nonetheless, little research has explored how the family context affects psychological responses to genetic testing. We examine how personal test results and the test results of immediate and extended family members shape responses to genetic testing., Methods: Individuals at risk of carrying a mutation associated with an inherited cancer susceptibility syndrome (Lynch syndrome) received genetic testing. Six months after receiving their results, participants reported on cancer distress, cancer worry, and depressive symptoms., Results: Among mutation carriers for Lynch syndrome, the higher the proportion of carriers in their immediate family, the less cancer worry and distress they reported. In contrast, mutation carriers and non-carriers with a high proportion of carriers in their immediate family and mutation carriers with a high proportion of carriers in their extended family were at elevated risk for clinically significant levels of depressive symptoms., Conclusion: Personal test results alone are not highly predictive of psychological outcomes. Instead, the interaction between personal and family test results, or in some cases, family test results alone, predict key psychological outcomes. The current research has important implications for genetic counseling and intervention efforts. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA., (Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

In the care of patients with Lynch Syndrome (LS), a range of psychosocial issues are encountered, which significantly affect patient outcomes. A brief historical background of 'psycho-onco-genetics' (the domain where psychology, oncology and genetics meet) in relation to LS is presented, followed by an overview of important psychosocial issues identified in the past 20 years. The identification of mismatch repair genes in 1993-1994 made possible genetic counseling and testing for patients who had cancer and for potentially high-risk relatives without cancer. At that time, concerns were raised about the potentially negative psychosocial impact of predictive genetic testing. Since 1993, a large number of studies have been conducted to investigate the possible psychosocial benefits and limitations of such testing. This article presents an overview of: the uptake of and motivations for genetic testing, its psychosocial impact (e.g. psychological adaptation, impact on risk perception and self-concept, and concerns about, and experiences of, genetic discrimination), psychological screening instruments, adherence to and decision-making about preventive strategies, family communication, lifestyle changes, reproductive technology utilization, and professional psychosocial support needs of members of families with LS. Finally, challenges for the future are discussed, including population screening and genomic testing.

An increasing number of individuals seek genetic counseling and hereby learn about hereditary cancer in the family. Lynch syndrome is associated with an inherited high risk for colorectal and gynecological cancer, but knowledge about how family members at risk perceive their situation is limited. We used the national Danish HNPCC register to collect data on self-concept from 413 individuals with Lynch syndrome. The recently developed Lynch syndrome self-concept scale contains 20 items within two subscales related to stigma-vulnerability and bowel symptom-related anxiety. Significantly higher total scores, indicating a greater impact on self-concept, were reported by females and by individuals with experience from cancer in close relatives, whereas individuals with less formal education scored significantly higher on the stigma and vulnerability subscale. Scores in the upper quartile were more often reported by women (odds ratio 1.8) and by individuals with less education (OR 1.8). This study provides the first extended use of the Lynch syndrome self-concept scale and suggests that the majority of the Danish mutation carriers adapt well to the situation, though knowledge about the increased risk of cancer seem to have a greater impact in females, individuals with less education and those with experience of cancer in close relatives.

Current diagnostic practices have shortened the interval between colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and genetic analysis for Lynch syndrome by MSI-testing. We studied the relation of time between MSI-testing since CRC diagnosis (MSI-CRC interval) and psychological distress. We performed a cross-sectional study in 89 patients who had previously been treated for CRC. Data were collected during MSI-testing after genetic counseling. Psychological distress was measured with the IES, the SCL-90 and the POMS; social issues with the ISS, ISB and the ODHCF. The median time of MSI-CRC interval was 24 months (range 0-332), with 23% of the patients diagnosed less than 12 months and 42% more than 36 months prior to MSI-testing. In 34% of the patients cancer specific distress was high (IES scores >26). Mean psychopathology (SCL-90) scores were low, mean mood states (POMS) scores were moderate. Interval MSI-CRC was not related to psychological distress. High cancer specific distress was reported by 24% of patients diagnosed with CRC less than 12 months ago versus 39 and 35% by those diagnosed between 12 and 36 months and more than 36 months ago respectively. Distress was positively related to female gender (P = 0.04), religiousness (P = 0.01), low social support (P = 0.02) and difficulties with family communication (P < 0.001). Shortened time interval between CRC diagnosis and MSI-testing is not associated with higher psychological distress. Females, religious persons, those having low social support and those reporting difficulties communicating hereditary colorectal cancer with relatives are at higher risk for psychological distress.

Identification of hereditary predisposition to cancer has limited significance if not followed by efficient cancer prevention. The responsibility of informing offspring about genetic risk often falls to the parents. We systematically investigated how parents with Lynch Syndrome share knowledge of genetic risk with their offspring, challenges in the communication process and wish for professional support. Of all known mutation carriers over age 40 (n = 337) in 102 Finnish Lynch Syndrome families, 86% completed a self-reported questionnaire; 248 of them (86%) had children. Of the 248 parents, 87% reported disclosure and 13% nondisclosure. Reasons for nondisclosure were mainly the young age of offspring, socially distant relationships, or feeling of difficulty in discussing the topic. Men reported significantly more often disclosure with a support person (spouse etc.) (P < 0.001). The most difficult communication aspect was discussing children's cancer risk. Of the 191 firstborn adult children informed, 69% had taken the predictive genetic test. Every third parent suggested that health professionals should be involved in passing on the information and that a family appointment at the genetic clinic should be organized at the time of disclosure. Nearly all parents had informed their adult offspring about the genetic risk and possibility of genetic testing, but almost one-third were unsure of how their offspring had used the information. The challenge is to improve the communication processes, so that all offspring would get the information important for their health care, and parents would get the professional support desired at disclosure.

An increasing number of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receive genetic counselling within 1 year after diagnosis. Little is known whether specific subgroups are more vulnerable for genetic testing related distress. A literature review was conducted to identify the psychological impact of CRC in the first year, and the additional impact of genetic testing. The electronic databases of PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify all reports published between January 1997 and October 2007 on the psychological impact of (1) CRC-diagnosis up to 1 year after treatment and of (2) genetic testing for Lynch syndrome in patients with CRC. Studies on the psychological impact of genetic testing in newly diagnosed patient with CRC were not available. Either CRC patients diagnosed several years ago were studied and the focus was also often on the psychological impact of genetic testing prior to DNA-test disclosure. They show that limitations in emotional and social functioning can persist up to 1 year after CRC treatment, especially in those with a stoma or diagnosed before age 60. Female patients and male patients diagnosed before age 50 appear to be more vulnerable to genetic test-related distress. It is well known that being treated for CRC has great impact on psychological functioning. Little is known about the psychological impact during the first year after diagnosis and very little is known about the additional psychological effect of genetic testing for hereditary cancer in this period. We found presumptive evidence that specific subgroups of patients with CRC are more vulnerable for genetic-testing-related distress.

The associations between characteristics of family relationships and family trends in cancer worry and the psychological adjustment of recipients of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility were investigated. Data provided by 178 individuals from 24 families with Lynch syndrome who participated in a cohort study investigating psychological and behavioral outcomes of genetic testing were used. Responses from multiple family members were aggregated to construct family trends representing norms and departure from norms in cancer worry. Lower perceived family cohesion at baseline and decrease in this variable at 6 months after receipt of test results were associated with higher depression scores at 12 months. More variability in cancer worry among family members at baseline was also associated with higher depression scores at 12 months. Increase in family conflict was associated with decrease in depression scores among individuals from families with higher levels of cancer worry on average and less variability among the members. Family relationships and family trends in levels of cancer worry may play important roles in the psychological adjustment of genetic test recipients. The findings highlight the complexity of familial environment surrounding individuals that undergo genetic testing and suggest the benefits of considering these factors when providing genetic services.

Communicating genetic-risk information is fraught with difficulties, and there are no universally accepted guidelines for clinical practice. In this paper, we suggest that information-processing models may offer some guidance for the communication of genetic risk. The paper reviews selected literature from health and social psychology, including defensive reactions to threatening health information, the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) and Self Affirmation Theory. Ultimately, it presents the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) of information processing as a useful perspective from which to view genetic-risk communication. Through our review of this literature, we identify some of the variables found to influence the systematic or heuristic processing of risk information and note their relevance to genetic counseling contexts. We suggest that systematic information processing is conducive to informed decision-making, as well as improved understanding of risk information. Clinical practice implications derived from our review of these literatures are noted.

This study examined prospectively the contribution of family functioning, differentiation to parents, family communication and support from relatives to psychological distress in individuals undergoing genetic susceptibility testing for a known familial pathogenic BRCA1/2 or Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer-related mutation. Family functioning, differentiation to parents, hereditary cancer-related family communication and perceived support from relatives were assessed in 271 participants for genetic testing before test result disclosure. Hereditary cancer distress (assessed by the Impact of Event Scale) and cancer worry (assessed by the Cancer Worry Scale) were assessed before, 1 week after, and 6 months after test result disclosure. Participants reporting more cancer-related distress over the study period more frequently perceived the communication about hereditary cancer with relatives as inhibited, the nuclear family functioning as disengaged-rigid or enmeshed-chaotic, the support from partner as less than adequate and the relationship to mother as less differentiated. Especially, open communication regarding hereditary cancer and partner support may be important buffers against hereditary cancer distress. Identifying individuals with insufficient sources of support and addressing the family communication concerning hereditary cancer in genetic counseling may help the counselee to adjust better to genetic testing.

This study explored predictors for hereditary cancer distress six months after genetic susceptibility testing for a known familial BRCA1/2 or HNPCC related mutation, in order to gain insight into aspects relevant for the identification of individuals needing additional psychosocial support. Coping, illness representations, experiences with cancer in relatives and family system characteristics were assessed in 271 applicants for genetic testing before result disclosure. Hereditary cancer distress was assessed prospectively up to six months after disclosure. Regression analysis revealed that the pretest level of distress, complicated grief, the number of affected first-degree relatives and strong emotional illness representations were factors that best explained hereditary cancer distress. Other significant predictors were illness coherence, passive coping, distraction seeking, being aged <13 years when a parent was affected by cancer and family communication. Individuals who may benefit from additional support may be identified before result disclosure using a short instrument assessing the relevant aspects.

Little research is available on the level of knowledge about ovarian cancer risk management options in women at increased risk for this disease. The study objectives were to evaluate this together with the information and ovarian cancer risk management preferences of high-risk women. One hundred and twenty-nine women were assessed after their attendance at one of six familial cancer clinics in relation to knowledge of surveillance and/or preventative strategies for reduction of ovarian cancer risk, preferences for particular strategies, and information preferences. Screening was selected by 57 (44%) women as the preferred risk management option. One hundred and five women (82%) indicated a wish for as much information as possible about ovarian cancer, including both good and bad outcomes and 114 (89%) reported a preference for sharing treatment decisions with their health professional. Participants' knowledge about ovarian cancer risk management options was significantly associated with educational levels (Z = -3.2, p=0.001) and whether or not ovarian cancer was included in the family history (Z = -2.3, p = 0.018). Findings from this present study indicate that women at increased risk of ovarian cancer who attend familial cancer clinics want as much information as possible about this disease and they want to be involved in the decision-making process. Women who reported a lower level of education (no post-school qualifications) may be most likely to benefit from additional educational strategies designed to supplement genetic counseling to improve their knowledge levels., (Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Aim: To examine psychological distress in women at risk of familial breast-ovarian cancer (FBOC) or hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) with absence of demonstrated mutations in the family (unknown mutation)., Materials and Methods: Two-hundred and fifty three consecutive women at risk of FBOC and 77 at risk of HNPCC and with no present or past history of cancer. They were aware of their risk and had received genetic counseling. Comparisons were made between these two groups, normal controls, and women who were identified to be BRCA1 mutation carriers. The questionnaires Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Impact of Event Scale (IES) were employed to assess psychological distress., Results: No significant differences concerning psychological distress were observed between women with FBOC and women with HNPCC. Compared to mutation carriers for BRCA1, the level of anxiety and depression was significantly higher in the FBOC group with absence of demonstrated mutation. Compared to normal controls, the level of anxiety was higher, while the level of depression was lower in the groups with unknown mutation., Conclusions: Women in the absence of demonstrated mutations have higher anxiety and depression levels than women with known mutation-carrier status. Access to genetic testing may be of psychologically benefit to women at risk for FBOC or HNPCC.

When considering the impact of a genetic diagnosis of hereditary predisposition to colon cancer, there are many similarities to other predictive genetic tests, but also many differences. The development and availability of such genetic diagnoses, and the concept of testing being linked to effective prevention, have advanced rapidly, opening up not only unique opportunities but also unique psychosocial situations for the affected families-and unusual ethical issues for the professional. Compared to a diagnosis of sporadic colorectal cancer for a patient, hereditary colorectal cancer requires an understanding of genetics, heredity, and the attendant mathematics of risk calculation, but, most importantly, there must be a belief that it is possible to remain healthy whilst having an increased risk. This paper outlines the possible impact of a genetic diagnosis of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) or familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) on both the individual and the family and concludes that genetic testing should be accompanied by genetic counseling. Relevant ethical issues are also introduced, with the opinion presented suggesting that if primary considerations are always for the individual rather than the family or society, then unethical or eugenic decisions are likely to be avoided.