Search

Individuals with genetic disease face unique challenges related to navigating dating relationships. While previous studies have explored the impact of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome on dating, research investigating psychosocial implications for young adults with early-onset multi-organ tumor predisposition syndromes such as von Hippel-Lindau disease (VHL) is scarce. This study assessed young adults' attitudes towards dating and decisions related to disclosing a diagnosis of VHL to a dating partner. Twenty-six young adults with VHL participated in semi-structured interviews exploring this issue, using a guide informed by the literature in consultation with providers and an individual with VHL. Interviews were coded with a primarily deductive approach using codes derived from the literature, with inductive coding employed for perspectives unique to VHL. Our results support previous findings that genetic disease contributes to fear of rejection due to decreased desirability. However, participants report that partners' reactions to VHL uniquely exacerbate this concern due to unfamiliarity with VHL and a perception that it is exceptionally serious, leading to different strategies in disclosure. While many cited negative reactions from partners, participants also described how disclosure can strengthen relationships by deepening trust. Participants discussed a desire for healthcare providers to offer support in this context and described the benefit of speaking with peers about their dating experiences and approaches to disclosure. Our findings provide insight into the diverse needs of young adults with VHL as they approach romantic relationships and decision-making regarding disclosure and highlight the importance of patient-centered support from providers and patient organizations.

Genetic counselors (GCs) have traditionally been trained to adopt a position of equipoise or clinical neutrality. They provide information, answer questions, address barriers, and engage in shared decision-making, but generally, they do not prescribe a genetic test. Historically, GCs have generally been trained not to persuade the ambivalent or resistant patient. More recently, however, there has been discussion regarding when a greater degree of persuasion or directionality may be appropriate within genetic counseling (GC) and what role MI may play in this process. The role for “persuasive GC” is based on the premise that some genetic tests provide actionable information that would clearly benefit patients and families by impacting treatment or surveillance. For other tests, the benefits are less clear as they do not directly impact patient care or the benefits may be more subjective in nature, driven by patient values or psychological needs. For the former, we propose that GCs may adopt a more persuasive clinical approach while for the latter, a more traditional equipoise stance may be more appropriate. We suggest that motivational interviewing (MI) could serve as a unifying counseling model that allows GCs to handle both persuasive and equipoise encounters. For clearly beneficial tests, while directional, the MI encounter can still be non-directive, autonomy-supportive, and patient-centered. MI can also be adapted for equipoise situations, for example, placing less emphasis on eliciting and strengthening change talk as that is more a behavior change strategy than a shared decision-making strategy. The core principles and strategies of MI, such as autonomy support, evocation, open questions, reflective listening, and affirmation would apply to both persuasive and equipoise encounters. Key issues that merit discussion include how best to train GCs both during their initial and post-graduate education.

Approximately 80 per cent of patients with colorectal cancer have sporadic disease whereas the remaining 20 per cent seem to have a genetic component. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) is the most common autosomal dominant hereditary syndrome predisposing to colorectal cancer. Various methods have been described to screen for HNPCC and to directly test for mismatch repair gene mutations. This study evaluates the initial results of 1) microsatellite instability (MSI) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining of tumors and 2) genetic sequencing for mismatch repair gene mutations in patients suspected to have HNPCC. Appropriate patients for HNPCC testing were identified through a high-risk colorectal cancer clinic. Of those patients screened only those who met Amsterdam criteria (AC) for HNPCC or were young age onset (YAO) (