Advertisement

Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 355–364 | Cite as

The Use of Family History Questionnaires: An Examination of Genetic Risk Estimates and Genetic Testing Eligibility in the Non-responder Population

  • Susan Randall Armel
  • Kara Hitchman
  • Kathryn Millar
  • Laura Zahavich
  • Rochelle Demsky
  • Joan Murphy
  • Barry Rosen
Original Research

Abstract

The use of mailed family history questionnaires (FHQs) has previously been established to be an effective method for obtaining family history information for the triage of patients for genetic counseling and genetic testing of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome; yet only 53% of patients complete their FHQ within 6 months from the date of mailing (Armel et al. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18(4):366–378, 2009). Although literature exists evaluating why women may not attend genetic counseling, no data are currently available examining genetic risk or genetic testing eligibility in the population of patients not returning their FHQ (non-responders). Concern exists that if non-responders are not followed-up for the purpose of triage for genetic counseling, individuals at high-risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome may be missed. This article explores the demographics of the non-responder population to assess genetic risk estimates for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and genetic testing eligibility as compared to a responder population of patients who completed a mailed FHQ. A total of 430 pedigrees were obtained, 215 from non-responders and 215 from responders. Results of this study indicate that 69% of non-responders were either unreachable by telephone (42%), declined an appointment (19%), or were previously seen in another center for a genetic counseling visit (8%). Additionally, results indicate that non-responders are less likely to be eligible for genetic testing (40%) as compared to responders (57%) (p = 0.0004). Together these data shed light on a population of patients for which limited information exists and suggest that we question how and to what extent clinics should pursue non-responders, particularly in light of global reductions in health care funding.

Keywords

Genetic counseling Family history Questionnaire Attendance rate Genetic testing eligibility Genetic risk estimate Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome 

References

  1. Antoniou, A. C., Pharoah, P. D., Narod, S., Risch, H. A., Eyfjord, J. E., Hopper, J. L., et al. (2005). Breast and ovarian cancer risks to carriers of the BRCA1 5382insC and 185delAG and BRCA2 6174delT mutations: a combined analysis of 22 population based studies. Journal of Medical Genetics, 42(7), 602–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armel, S. R., McCuaig, J., Finch, A., Demsky, R., Panzarella, T., Murphy, J., et al. (2009). The effectiveness of family history questionnaires in cancer genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18(4), 366–378.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, K., Calzone, K., Stopfer, J., Fitzgerald, G., Coyne, J., & Weber, B. (2000). Factors associated with decisions about clinical BRCA1/2 testing. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention: A Publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, Cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 9(11), 1251–1254.Google Scholar
  4. Berry, D. A., Iversen, E. S., Jr., Gudbjartsson, D. F., Hiller, E. H., Garber, J. E., Peshkin, B. N., et al. (2002). BRCAPRO validation, sensitivity of genetic testing of BRCA1/BRCA2, and prevalence of other breast cancer susceptibility genes. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 20(11), 2701–2712.Google Scholar
  5. Brener, D., Schulz, C., Schluger, A., & Offit, K. (1996). A self-administered family history questionnaire (FHQ) utilized in an outpatient setting to assess cancer risk. American Journal of Human Genetics, 59(A333).Google Scholar
  6. Canadian Cancer Society. (2009b). Breast cancer statistics. Retrieved 4/26/2010, 2010, from http://www.cancer.ca/Canada-wide/Aboutcancer/Cancerstatistics/Statsataglance/Breastcancer.aspx?sc_lang=en.
  7. Cappelli, M., Surh, L., Humphreys, L., Verma, S., Logan, D., Hunter, A., et al. (1999). Psychological and social determinants of women’s decisions to undergo genetic counseling and testing for breast cancer. Clinical Genetics, 55(6), 419–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chalmers, K. I., Luker, K. A., Leinster, S. J., Ellis, I., & Booth, K. (2001). Information and support needs of women with primary relatives with breast cancer: Development of the information and support needs questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(4), 497–507.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Easton, D. F., Ford, D., & Bishop, D. T. (1995). Breast and ovarian cancer incidence in BRCA1-mutation carriers. breast cancer linkage consortium. American Journal of Human Genetics, 56(1), 265–271.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Easton, D. F., Steele, L., Fields, P., Ormiston, W., Averill, D., Daly, P. A., et al. (1997). Cancer risks in two large breast cancer families linked to BRCA2 on chromosome 13q12-13. American Journal of Human Genetics, 61(1), 120–128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ford, D., Easton, D. F., Stratton, M., Narod, S., Goldgar, D., Devilee, P., et al. (1998). Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. the breast cancer linkage consortium. American Journal of Human Genetics, 62(3), 676–689.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foster, C., Evans, D. G., Eeles, R., Eccles, D., Ashley, S., Brooks, L., et al. (2004). Non-uptake of predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 among relatives of known carriers: Attributes, cancer worry, and barriers to testing in a multicenter clinical cohort. Genetic Testing, 8(1), 23–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Geer, K. P., Ropka, M. E., Cohn, W. F., Jones, S. M., & Miesfeldt, S. (2001). Factors influencing patients' decisions to decline cancer genetic counseling services. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 10(1), 25–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hagoel, L., Dishon, S., Almog, R., Silman, Z., Bisland-Becktell, S., & Rennert, G. (2000). Proband family uptake of familial-genetic counseling. Psycho-Oncology, 9(6), 522–527.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hallowell, N., Murton, F., Statham, H., Green, J. M., & Richards, M. P. (1997). Women's need for information before attending genetic counseling for familial breast or ovarian cancer: a questionnaire, interview, and observational study. BMJ, 314(7076), 281.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Humphreys, L., Hunter, A. G., Zimak, A., O'Brien, A., Korneluk, Y., & Cappelli, M. (2000). Why patients do not attend for their appointments at a genetics clinic. Journal of Medical Genetics, 37(10), 810–815.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Julian-Reynier, C., Sobol, H., Sevilla, C., Nogues, C., Bourret, P., & French Cancer Genetic Network. (2000). Uptake of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer genetic testing in a french national sample of BRCA1 families. the french cancer genetic network. Psycho-Oncology, 9(6), 504–510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lerman, C., Daly, M., Masny, A., & Balshem, A. (1994). Attitudes about genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 12(4), 843–850.Google Scholar
  19. Lerman, C., Narod, S., Schulman, K., Hughes, C., Gomez-Caminero, A., Bonney, G., et al. (1996). BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes. JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association, 275(24), 1885–1892.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miki, Y., Swensen, J., Shattuck-Eidens, D., Futreal, P. A., Harshman, K., Tavtigian, S., et al. (1994). A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science (New York, N.Y.), 266(5182), 66–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rimer, B. K., Schildkraut, J. M., Lerman, C., Lin, T. H., & Audrain, J. (1996). Participation in a women's breast cancer risk counseling trial. who participates? who declines? high risk breast cancer consortium. Cancer, 77(11), 2348–2355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Risch, H. A., McLaughlin, J. R., Cole, D. E. C., Rosen, B., Bradley, L., Kwan, E., et al. (2001). Prevalence and penetrance of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population series of 649 women with ovarian cancer. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 68(3), 700–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Risch, H. A., McLaughlin, J. R., Cole, D. E., Rosen, B., Bradley, L., Fan, I., et al. (2006). Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: A kin-cohort study in ontario, canada. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98(23), 1694–1706.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schlich-Bakker, K., ten Kroode, H., Wárlám-Rodenhuis, C., van den Bout, J., & Ausems, M. (2007). Barriers to participating in genetic counseling and BRCA testing during primary treatment for breast cancer. Genetics in Medicine, 9(11), 766.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Struewing, J. P., Lerman, C., Kase, R. G., Giambarresi, T. R., & Tucker, M. A. (1995). Anticipated uptake and impact of genetic testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention: A Publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, Cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 4(2), 169–173.Google Scholar
  26. Wooster, R., Neuhausen, S. L., Mangion, J., Quirk, Y., Ford, D., Collins, N., et al. (1994). Localization of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA2, to chromosome 13q12-13. Science (New York, N.Y.), 265(5181), 2088–2090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan Randall Armel
    • 1
  • Kara Hitchman
    • 1
  • Kathryn Millar
    • 1
  • Laura Zahavich
    • 1
  • Rochelle Demsky
    • 1
  • Joan Murphy
    • 1
  • Barry Rosen
    • 1
  1. 1.The Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer ClinicPrincess Margaret HospitalTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations