Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychosocial Outcomes of Screening for Cancer and Pre-invasive Disease

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Pre-Invasive Disease: Pathogenesis and Clinical Management

Abstract

Screening is an important strategy for reducing cancer-related mortality in developed countries. Programmes for breast and cervical cancer screening are well established, while protocols for prostate, colorectal and ovarian cancer are still being developed [1–7]. Population screening programmes help to detect both invasive cancers and pre-malignant disease. Prompt treatment of those identified with ca­ncer can reduce mortality, although screening trials do not consistently improve survival [8–12]. Diagnosing cancer early may mean that less invasive treatments with better clinical outcomes can be offered to patients [13, 14].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gøtzsche P, Nielsen M (2006) Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4):CD001877

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bergstrom R, Sparen P, Adami H (1999) Trends in cancer of the cervix uteri in Sweden following cytological screening. Br J Cancer 81(159):166

    Google Scholar 

  3. Naucler P, Ryd W, Tornberg S, Strand A, Wadell G, Elfgren K et al (2007) Human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou tests to screen for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 357(16): 1589–1597

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Benson V, Patnick J, Davies A, Nadel M, Smith R, Atkin W et al (2008) Colorectal screening: a comparison of 35 initiatives in 17 countries. Int J Cancer 122:1357–1367

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Irwig L, Towler B, Watson E (2007) Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Haemoccult. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1(CD001216)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ilic D, O’Connor D, Green S, Wilt T (2009) Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3(CD004720)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Menon U, Gentry-Maharaj A, Hallett R, Ryan A, Burnell M, Sharma A et al (2009) Sensitivity and specificity of multimodal and ultrasound screening for ovarian cancer, and stage distribution of detected cancers: results of the prevalence screen of the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS). Lancet Oncol 10(4):327–340

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, Landberg T, Lindholm K, Linell F et al (1988) Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. BMJ 297(6654):943–948

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Adami H, Ponten J, Sparen P, Bergstrom R, Gustafsson L, Friberg L (1994) Survival trend after invasice cervical cancer diagnosis in Sweden before anf after cytologic screening. Cancer 73(1):140–147

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM et al (1993) Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 328(19):1365–1371

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL III, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR et al (2009) Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 360(13):1310–1319

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C (2002) The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up: a randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med 137:305–312

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1227–1232

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ganz PA, Kwan L, Stanton AL, Krupnick JL, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE et al (2004) Quality of life at the end of primary treatment of breast cancer: first results from the moving beyond cancer randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(5):376–387

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang K, Samplinrer R (2008) The Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Updated guidelines 2008 for the diagnosis, surveillance and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 103(788):797

    Google Scholar 

  16. Playford RJ (2006) New British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut 55(4):442

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O’Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS et al (1993) Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med 329(27):1977–1981

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Atkin WS, Saunders BP (2002) Surveillance guidelines after removal of colorectal adenomatous polyps. Gut 51(90005):v6–v9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Atkin WS, Morson BC, Cuzick J (1992) Long-term risk of colorectal cancer after excision of rectosigmoid adenomas. N Engl J Med 326(10):658–662

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP, Weiss NS (1992) A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 326(10):653–657

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lynch HT, Lynch JF (1986) Breast cancer genetics in an oncology clinic: 328 consecutive patients. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 22(4):369–371

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kinzler KW, Nilbert MC, Su LK, Vogelstein B, Bryan TM, Levy DB et al (1991) Identification of FAP locus genes from chromosome 5q21. Science 253(5020):661–665

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Leach FS, Nicolaides NC, Papadopoulos N, Liu B, Jen J, Parsons R et al (1993) Mutations of a mutS homolog in hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Cell 75(6):1215–1225

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wilson J, Junger G (1968) Principles and practice of screening for disease. WHO Chron 22(11):473

    Google Scholar 

  25. Esplen M, Madlensky L, Aronson M, Rothenmund H, Gallinger S, Butler K et al (2007) Colorectal cancer survivors undergoing testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivational factors and pyschosocial functioning. Clin Genet 72:394–401

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Miles A, Wardle J (2006) Adverse psychological outcomes in colorectal cancer screening: does health anxiety play a role? Behav Res Ther 44(8):1117–1127

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Brown SJ, Lehlbach M (2008) The role of anxiety in a mammography screening program. Psychosomatics 49(1):49–55

    Google Scholar 

  28. Janz NK, Wren PA, Schottenfeld D, Guire KE (2003) Colorectal cancer screening attitudes and behavior: a population-based study. Prev Med 37(6):627–634

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tessaro I, Mangone C, Parkar I, Pawar V (2006) Knowledge, barriers and predictors of colorectal cancer screening in an Appalachian church population. Prev Chronic Dis 3(4):A123

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sun WY, Basch CE, Wolf RL, Li XJ (2004) Factors associated with colorectal cancer screening among Chinese-Americans. Prev Med 39(2):323–329

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Aro A, de Koning HJ, Absetz P, Schreck M (2001) Two distinct groups of non-attenders in an organised mammography screening program. Breast Cancer Res Treat 70(2):145–153

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Duffett-Leger L, Letourneau N, Croll J (2008) Cervical cancer screening practices among university women. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 37:572–581

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chan YM, Lee PWH, Ng TY, Ngan HYS (2004) Could precolposcopy information and counseling reduce women’s anxiety and improve knowledge and compliance to follow-up? Gynecol Oncol 95(2):341–346

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Brunton M, Jordan C, Campbell I (2005) Anxiety before, during, and after participation in a population-based screening mammography programme in Waikato Province, New Zealand. N Z Med J 118(1209):U1299

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lagerlund M, Hedin A, Sparqn P, Thurfjell E, Lambe M (2000) Attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge as predictors of nonattendance in a Swedish population-based mammography screening program. Prev Med 31(4):417–428

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Consedine NS, Magai C, Neugut AI (2004) The contribution of emotional characteristics to breast cancer screening among women from six ethnic groups. Prev Med 38(1):64–77

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Vernon SW, Marani SK, Baile WF, Watts BG et al (2005) Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(9):1902–1910

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Meiser B, Collins V, Warren R, Gaff C, St John D, Young M et al (2004) Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Clin Genet 66:502–511

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Wardle J, Williamson S, Sutton S, Biran A, McCaffery K, Cuzick J et al (2003) Psychological impact of colorectal cancer screening. Health Psychol 22(1):54–59

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Taylor KL, Shelby R, Gelmann E, McGuire C (2004) Quality of life and trial adherence among participants in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(14):1083–1094

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Taupin D, Chambers S, Corbett M, Shadbolt B (2006) Colonoscopic screening for colorectal cancer improves quality of life measures: a population-based screening study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4(1):82

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Arver B, Haegermark A, Platten U, Lindblom A, Brandberg Y (2004) Evaluation of psychosocial effects of pre-symptomatic testing for breast/ovarian and colon cancer pre-disposing genes: a 12-month follow-up. Fam Cancer 3(2):109–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. FDA (2009) Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. FDA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bleiker EMA, Menko FH, Taal BG, Kluijt I, Wever LDV, Gerritsma MA et al (2003) Experience of discharge from colonoscopy of mutation negative HNPCC family members. J Med Genet 40(5):e55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. French D, Maissi E, Marteau T (2006) The psychological costs of inadequate cervical smear test results: three-month follow-up. Psychooncology 15(6):498–508

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Fowler F Jr, Barry M, Walker-Corkery B, Caubet J, Bates D, Lee J et al (2006) The impact of a suspicious prostate biopsy on patients’ psychological, socio-behavioral, and medical care outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 21:715–721

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Spielberger C (1983) Manual for the state/trait anxiety inventory (form Y): (self evaluation questionnaire). Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA

    Google Scholar 

  48. Radloff L (1977) The CES-D scale: a self report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas 1:385–401

    Google Scholar 

  49. Zigmond A, Snaith R (1983) The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 67:361–370

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. The Euro-Qol Group (1990) EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16(3):199–208

    Google Scholar 

  51. Gray NM, Sharp L, Cotton SC, Avis M, Philips Z, Russell I et al (2005) Developing a questionnaire to measure the psychosocial impact of an abnormal cervical smear result and its subsequent management: the TOMBOLA (Trial Of Management of Borderline and Other Low-grade Abnormal smears) trial. Qual Life Res 14(6):1553–1562

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE (1993) The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 31(3):247–263

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Bloom JR, Stewart SL, Oakley-Girvans I, Banks PJ, Chang S (2006) Family history, perceived risk, and prostate cancer screening among African American men. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(11):2167–2173

    Google Scholar 

  54. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A et al (1993) The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11(3):570–579

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Spielberger C (1970) Manual for the stait-trait anxiety inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA

    Google Scholar 

  57. Spielberger C, Reheiser E, Ritterband L, Sydeman S, Unger K (1995) Assessment of emotional states and personality traits: measuring psychological vital signs. In: Butcher J (ed) Clinical personality assessment: practical approaches. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  58. Barnes LLB, Harp D, Jung WS (2002) Reliability generalization of scores on the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Educ Psychol Meas 62(4):603–618

    Google Scholar 

  59. Vernon SW, Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Amos CI, Perz CA, Baile WF et al (1997) Correlates of psychologic distress in colorectal cancer patients undergoing genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer. Health Psychol 16(1):73–86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, Brbaugh J (1961) An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 4:561–571

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Zung W (1965) A self-rating depression scale. Arch Gen Psychiatry 12:63–70

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Raskin A, Schulterbrandt J, Reatig N, Rice CE (1967) Factors of psychopathology in interview, ward behavior, and self-report ratings of hospitalized depressives. J Consult Psychol 31(3):270–278

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Devins GM, Orme CM, Costello CG, Binik YM, Frizzell B, Stam HJ et al (1988) Measuring depressive symptoms in illness populations: Psychometric properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale. Psychol Health 2(2):139–156

    Google Scholar 

  64. Basen-Engquist K, Shinn EH, Warneke C, de Moor C, Le T, Richards-Kortum R et al (2003) Patient distress and satisfaction with optical spectroscopy in cervical dysplasia detection. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189(4):1136–1142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. van Wilgen C, Dijkstra P, Stewart R, Ranchor A, Roodenburg J (2006) Measuring somatic symptoms with the CES-D to assess depression in cancer patients after treatment: comparison among patients with oral/oropharyngeal, gynaecological, colorectal and breast cancer. Psychosomatics 47:465–470

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Tiffen J, Sharp L, O’Toole C (2005) Depressive symptoms prescreening and postscreening among returning participants in an ovarian cancer early detection program. Cancer Nurs 28(4):325–330

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, Neckelmann D (2002) The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: an updated literature review. J Psychosom Res 52(2):69–77

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Geirdal AO, Dahl AA (2008) The relationship between psychological distress and personality in women from families with familial breast/ovarian or hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer in the absence of demonstrated mutations. J Genet Couns 17(4):384–393

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Avery K, Metcalfe C, Blazeby J, Lane J, Neal D, Hamdy F et al (2008) Prostate specific antigen testing and prostate biopsy: are self-reported lower urinary tract symptoms and health-related quality of life associated with the decision to undergo these investigations? BJU Int 102:1629–1633

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. AWsare N, Green J, Aldwinckle B, Boustead G, McNicholas T (2008) The measurement of psychological distress in men being investigated for the presence of prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 11(4):384–389

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Brindle L, Oliver S, Dedman D, Donovan J, Neal D, Hamdy F et al (2006) Measuring the psychosocial impact of population-based prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer in the UK. BJU Int 98:777–782

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Whynes D, Woolley C, Philips Z, for the TOMBOLA Group (2008) Management of low-grade cervical abnormalities detected at screening: which method do women prefer? Cytopathology 19(6):355–362

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Tyndel S, Austoker J, Henderson BJ, Brain K, Bankhead C, Clements A et al (2007) What is the psychological impact of mammographic screening on younger women with a family history of breast cancer? Findings from a prospective cohort study by the PIMMS Management Group. J Clin Oncol 25(25):3823–3830

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Absetz P, Aro AR, Sutton SR (2003) Experience with breast cancer, pre-screening perceived susceptibility and the psychological impact of screening. Psychooncology 12(4):305–318

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alavarez W (1979) Impact of events scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med 41:209–218

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Sundin E (2002) Impact of events scale: psychometric properties. Br J Psychiatry 180:205–209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Thewes B, Meiser B, Hickie I (2001) Psychometrci properties of the impact of events scale among women at increased risk of hereditary breast cancer. Psychooncology 10:459–468

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Brown W, Pakenham K (2004) Mammography screening distress and pain: changes over time and relations with breast symptoms, implants and cancer detection concerns. Psychol Health Med 9(4):403–410

    Google Scholar 

  79. Domar AD, Eyvazzadeh A, Allen S, Roman K, Wolf R, Orav J et al (2005) Relaxation techniques for reducing pain and anxiety during screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184(2):445–447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Lambertz C, Johnson C, Montgomery P, Maxwell J (2008) Premedication to reduce discomfort during screening mammography. Radiology 248(3):765–772

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Barton MB, Morley DS, Moore S, Allen JD, Kleinman KP, Emmons KM et al (2004) Decreasing women’s anxieties after abnormal mammograms: a controlled trial [see comment]. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(7):529–538

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Heckman BD, Fisher EB, Monsees B, Merbaum M, Ristvedt S, Bishop C (2004) Coping and anxiety in women recalled for additional diagnostic procedures following an abnormal screening mammogram. Health Psychol 23(1):42–48

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Lampic C, Thurfjell E, Sjoden PO (2003) The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman’s subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 39(12):1730–1737

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Currence BV, Pisano ED, Earp JA, Moore A, Chiu YF, Brown ME et al (2003) Does biopsy, aspiration or six-month follow-up of a false-positive mammogram reduce future screening or have large psychosocial effects? Acad Radiol 10(11):1257–1266

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Jatoi I, Zhu K, Shah M, Lawrence W (2006) Psychological distress in U.S. women who have experienced false-positive mammograms. Breast Cancer Res Treat 100(2):191–200

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Alderete E, Juarbe TC, Kaplan CP, Pasick R, Perez-Stable EJ (2006) Depressive symptoms among women with an abnormal mammogram. Psychooncology 15(1):66–78

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Pineault P (2007) Breast cancer screening: women’s experiences of waiting for further testing. Oncol Nurs Forum Online 34(4):847–853

    Google Scholar 

  88. Bottorff JL, Ratner PA, Johnson JL, Hislop TG, Buxton JA, Zeisser C et al (2007) Women’s responses to information on mammographic breast density. Can J Nurs Res 39(1):38–57

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Bowland L, Cockburn J, Cawson J, Anderson HC, Moorehead S, Kenny M (2003) Counselling interventions to address the psychological consequences of screening mammography: a randomised trial. Patient Educ Couns 49(2):189–198

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Powles T, Ashley S, Tidy A, Smith I, Dowsett M (2007) Twenty-year follow up of the Royal Marsden randomised double blinded tamoxifen breast cancer prevention trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 99(4):283–290

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Cuzick J, Forbes J, Sestak I, Cawthorn S, Hamed H, Holli K et al (2007) Long-term results of tamoxifen prophylaxis for breast cancer – 96 month follow up of the randomised IBIS-I trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 99(4):272–282

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Fisher B, Costantino J, Wickerham D, Cecchini R, Cronin W, Robidoux A et al (2005) Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(22):1652–1662

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Cuzick J, Powles T, Veronesi U, Edwards R, Asheky S, Boyle P (2003) Overview of the main outcomes in breast cancer prevention trials. Lancet 361:296–300

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Cuzick J (2005) Aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer prevention. J Clin Oncol 23(8):1636–1643

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Jenkins VA, Ambroisine LM, Atkins L, Cuzick J, Howell A, Fallowfield LJ (2008) Effects of anastrozole on cognitive performance in postmenopausal women: a randomised, double-blind chemoprevention trial (IBIS II) [see comment]. Lancet Oncol 9(10):953–961

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Land S, Wickerham D, Constantino J, Ritter M, Vogel V, Lee M et al (2006) Patient-reported symptoms and quality of life during treatment with tamoxifen or raloxifene for breast cancer prevention. The NSABP Study of tamoxifen and raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial. JAMA 295(23):2742–2751

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Weitzel JN, Buys SS, Sherman WH, Daniels A, Ursin G, Daniels JR et al (2007) Reduced mammographic density with use of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist-based chemoprevention regimen in BRCA1 carriers. Clin Cancer Res 13(2 Pt 1):654–658

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Goss P, Richardson H, Chlebowski R, Johnston D, Sarto G, Maunsell E et al (2007) National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group MAP.3: evaluation of exemestane to prevent breast cancer in post menopausal women. Clin Breast Cancer 7(11):895–900

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Bober SL, Hoke LA, Duda RB, Regan MM, Tung NM (2004) Decision-making about tamoxifen in women at high risk for breast cancer: clinical and psychological factors. J Clin Oncol 22(24):4951–4957

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Peto J, Gilham C, Fletcher O, Matthews F (2004) The cervical cancer epidemic that screening has prevented in the UK. Lancet 364(9430):249–256

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD et al (2000) Accuracy of the papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities. Ann Intern Med 132(10):810–819

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Tahseen S, Reid P, Tahseen S (2008) Psychological distress associated with colposcopy: patients’ perception. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 139(1):90–94

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Breitkopf C, Catero J, Jaccard J, Berenson A (2004) Psychological and sociocultural perspectives on follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou results. Obstet Gynecol 104(6): 1347–1354

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Pruitt SL, Parker PA, Peterson SK, Le T, Follen M, Basen-Engquist K (2005) Knowledge of cervical dysplasia and human papillomavirus among women seen in a colposcopy clinic. Gynecol Oncol 99(3 Suppl 1):S236–S244

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Waller J, McCaffery K, Kitchener H, Nazroo J, Wardle J (2007) Women’s experiences of repeated HPV testing in the context of cervical cancer screening. A qualitative study. Psychooncology 16:196–204

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Maissi E, Marteau TM, Hankins M, Moss S, Legood R, Gray A (2004) Psychological impact of human papillomavirus testing in women with borderline or mildly dyskaryotic cervical smear test results: cross sectional questionnaire study. BMJ 328(7451):1293

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Basen-Engquist K, Fouladi RT, Cantor SB, Shinn E, Sui D, Sharman M et al (2007) Patient assessment of tests to detect cervical cancer. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 23(02):240–247

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Hounsgaard L, Petersen LK, Pedersen BD (2007) Facing possible illness detected through screening – experiences of healthy women with pathological cervical smears. Eur J Oncol Nurs 11(5):417–423

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Idestrom M, Milson I, Andersson-Ellstrom A (2003) Women’s experience of coping with a positive Pap smear: A register-based study of women with two consecutive Pap smears reported as CIN 1. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 82(8):756–761

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Karasz A, McKee MD, Roybal K (2003) Women’s experiences of abnormal cervical cytology: illness representations, care processes, and outcomes. Ann Fam Med 1(4):196–202

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Walsh JC, Curtis R, Mylotte M (2004) Anxiety levels in women attending a colposcopy clinic: a randomised trial of an educational intervention using video colposcopy. Patient Educ Couns 55(2):247–251

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TLJ, Ciatto S, Nelen V et al (2009) Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360(13):1320–1328

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Essink-Bot ML, de Koning HJ, Nijs HG, Kirkels WJ, van der Maas PJ, Schroder FH (1998) Short-term effects of population-based screening for prostate cancer on health-related quality of life. J Natl Cancer Inst 90(12):925–931

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Carlsson S, Aus G, Wessman C, Hugosson J (2007) Anxiety associated with prostate cancer screening with special reference to men with a positive screening test (elevated PSA) – results from a prospective, population-based, randomised study. Eur J Cancer 43(14):2109–2116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Metcalfe C, Martin RM, Noble S, Lane JA, Hamdy FC, Neal DE et al (2008) Low risk research using routinely collected identifiable health information without informed consent: encounters with the Patient Information Advisory Group. J Med Ethics 34(1):37–40

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Donovan J, Abrams P, Peters T, Kay H, Reynard J, Chapple C et al (1996) The ICS-‘BPH’ Study: the psychometric validity and reliability of the ICSmale questionnaire. Br J Urol 77:554–562

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  117. Avery KNL, Blazeby JM, Lane JA, Neal DE, Hamdy FC, Donovan JL (2008) Decision-making about PSA testing and prostate biopsies: a qualitative study embedded in a primary care randomised trial. Eur Urol 53(6):1186–1193

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Dominitz J, Provenzale D (1997) Patient preferences and quality of life associated with colorectal cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol 92(12):2171–2178

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Winawer SJ, Miller C, Lightdale C, Herbert E, Ephram R, Gordon L et al (1987) Patient response to sigmoidoscopy. A randomised controlled trial of rigid and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Cancer 60:1905–1908

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Drossman D, Brandt L, Sears C, Li Z, Nat J, Bozymski E (1996) A preliminary study of patients’ concerns related to GI endoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 91:287–291

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Thiis-Evensen E, Wilhelmsen I, Hoff GS, Blomhoff S, Sauar J (1999) The psychologic effect of attending a screening program for colorectal polyps. Scand J Gastroenterol 34(1):103–109

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Garside R, Pitt M, Somerville M, Stein K, Price A, Gilbert N (2006) Surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus: exploring the uncertainty through systematic review, expert workshop and economic modelling. Health Technol Assess 10(8):1–142

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Das D, Chilton AP, Jankowski JA (2009) Chemoprevention of oesophageal cancer and the AspECT trial. Cancer Prevention II. Recent Results Cancer Res 181:161–169

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Shaheen NJ, Sharma P, Overholt BF, Wolfsen HC, Sampliner RE, Wang KK et al (2009) Radiofrequency ablation in Barrett’s esophagus with dysplasia. N Engl J Med 360(22): 2277–2288

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Manser R, Irving L, Stone C, Byrnes G, Abramson M, Campbell D (2009) Screening for lung cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4)

    Google Scholar 

  126. Bach PB, Jett JR, Pastorino U, Tockman MS, Swensen SJ, Begg CB (2007) Computed tomography screening and lung cancer outcomes. JAMA 297:953–961 [see comment] [erratum appears in JAMA. 2007 Aug 1;298(5):518]

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Gohagan J, Marcus P, Fagerstrom R, Pinsky P, Kramer B, Prorok P (2004) Baseline findings of a randomized feasibility trial of lung cancer screening with spiral CT scan vs chest radiograph*. Chest 126(1):114–121

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. van Iersel C, de Koning H, Draisam G, Mali P, Scholten E, Nackaerts K et al (2006) Risk-based selection from the general population in a screening trial: selection criteria, recruitment and power for the Dutch-Belgian randomised lung cancer multi-slice CT screening trial. Int J Cancer 120:868–874

    Google Scholar 

  129. Bunge EM, van den Bergh KA, Essink-Bot ML, van Klaveren RJ, de Koning HJ (2008) High affective risk perception is associated with more lung cancer-specific distress in CT screening for lung cancer. Lung Cancer 62(3):385–390

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Dorval M, Bouchard K, Maunsell E, Plante M, Chiquette J, Camden S et al (2008) Health behaviors and psychological distress in women initiating BRCA1/2 genetic testing: comparison with control population. J Genet Couns 17(4):314–326

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Kelly K, Leventhal H, Andrykowski M, Toppmeyer D, Much J, Dermody J et al (2004) The decision to test in women receiving genetic counseling for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Genet Couns 13(3):237–257

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Rimes KA, Salkovskis PM, Jones L, Lucassen AM (2006) Applying a cognitive behavioral model of health anxiety in a cancer genetics service. Health Psychol 25(2):171–180

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Bjorvatn C, Eide GE, Hanestad BR, Oyen N, Havik OE, Carlsson A et al (2007) Risk perception, worry and satisfaction related to genetic counseling for hereditary cancer. J Genet Couns 16(2):211–222

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. McInerney-Leo A, Biesecker BB, Hadley DW, Kase RG, Giambarresi TR, Johnson E et al (2004) BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: effectiveness of problem-solving training as a counseling intervention. Am J Med Genet A 130A(3):221–227

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Matloff ET, Moyer A, Shannon KM, Niendorf KB, Col NF (2006) Healthy women with a family history of breast cancer: impact of a tailored genetic counseling intervention on risk perception, knowledge, and menopausal therapy decision making. J Womens Health 15(7):843–856

    Google Scholar 

  136. Gurmankin AD, Domchek S, Stopfer J, Fels C, Armstrong K (2005) Patients’ resistance to risk information in genetic counseling for BRCA1/2. Arch Intern Med 165(5):523–529

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Tercyak KP, Demarco TA, Mars BD, Peshkin BN (2004) Women’s satisfaction with genetic counseling for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer: psychological aspects. Am J Med Genet A 131(1):36–41

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Mikkelsen EM, Sunde L, Johansen C, Johnsen SP (2008) Psychosocial conditions of women awaiting genetic counseling: a population-based study. J Genet Couns 17(3):242–251

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Kodl MM, Lee JW, Matthews AK, Cummings SA, Olopade OI (2006) Correlates of depressive symptoms among women seeking cancer genetic counseling and risk assessment at a high-risk cancer clinic. J Genet Couns 15(4):267–276

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Halbert CH, Wenzel L, Lerman C, Peshkin BN, Narod S, Marcus A et al (2004) Predictors of participation in psychosocial telephone counseling following genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 13(5):875–881

    Google Scholar 

  141. Caruso A, Vigna C, Maggi G, Sega F, Cognetti F, Savarese A (2008) The withdrawal from oncogenic counselling and testing for hereditary and familial breast and ovarian cancer. A descriptive study of an Italian sample. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 27:75

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Reichelt JG, Moller P, Heimdal K, Dahl AA (2008) Psychological and cancer-specific distress at 18 months post-testing in women with demonstrated BRCA1 mutations for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Fam Cancer 7(3):245–254

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Lynch HT, Snyder C, Lynch JF, Karatoprakli P, Trowonou A, Metcalfe K et al (2006) Patient responses to the disclosure of BRCA mutation tests in hereditary breast-ovarian cancer families. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 165(2):91–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Beran TM, Stanton AL, Kwan L, Seldon J, Bower JE, Vodermaier A et al (2008) The trajectory of psychological impact in BRCA1/2 genetic testing: does time heal? Ann Behav Med 36(2):107–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Lodder LN, Duivenvoorden HJ, Van Gool AR, Seynaeve C et al (2003) Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: a 5-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol 21(20):3867–3874

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Foster C, Watson M, Eeles R, Eccles D, Ashley S, Davidson R et al (2007) Predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 in a UK clinical cohort: three-year follow-up. Br J Cancer 96(5):718–724

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  147. Stroup AM, Smith KR (2007) Familial effects of BRCA1 genetic mutation testing: changes in perceived family functioning. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 16(1):135–141

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  148. McInerney-Leo A, Biesecker BB, Hadley DW, Kase RG, Giambarresi TR, Johnson E et al (2005) BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: impact on relationships. Am J Med Genet A 133A(2):165–169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  149. Hamann HA, Smith TW, Smith KR, Croyle RT, Ruiz JM, Kircher JC et al (2008) Interpersonal responses among sibling dyads tested for BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutations. Health Psychol 27(1):100–109

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  150. Coyne JC, Kruus L, Racioppo M, Calzone KA, Armstrong K (2003) What do ratings of cancer-specific distress mean among women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer? Am J Med Genet A 116A(3):222–228

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  151. Andrews L, Meiser B, Apicella C, Tucker K (2004) Psychological impact of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in women of Ashkenazi Jewish background: a prospective study. Genet Test 8(3):240–247

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. van Dijk S, van Asperen CJ, Jacobi CE, Vink GR, Tibben A, Breuning MH et al (2004) Variants of uncertain clinical significance as a result of BRCA1/2 testing: impact of an ambiguous breast cancer risk message. Genet Test 8(3):235–239

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Dorval M, Gauthier G, Maunsell E, Dugas MJ, Rouleau I, Chiquette J et al (2005) No evidence of false reassurance among women with an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic test result. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 14(12):2862–2867

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  154. McInerney-Leo A, Hadley D, Kase RG, Giambarresi TR, Struewing JP, Biesecker BB (2006) BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families III: risk perception and screening. Am J Med Genet A 140(20):2198–2206

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Watson M, Foster C, Eeles R, Eccles D, Ashley S, Davidson R et al (2004) Psychosocial impact of breast/ovarian (BRCA1/2) cancer-predictive genetic testing in a UK multi-centre clinical cohort. Br J Cancer 91(10):1787–1794

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. van Dijk S, Timmermans DR, Meijers-Heijboer H, Tibben A, van Asperen CJ, Otten W (2006) Clinical characteristics affect the impact of an uninformative DNA test result: the course of worry and distress experienced by women who apply for genetic testing for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(22):3672–3677

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. van Roosmalen MS, Stalmeier PF, Verhoef LC, Hoekstra-Weebers JE, Oosterwijk JC, Hoogerbrugge N et al (2004) Impact of BRCA1/2 testing and disclosure of a positive test result on women affected and unaffected with breast or ovarian cancer. Am J Med Genet A 124A(4):346–355

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  158. Claes E, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Decruyenaere M, Denayer L, Legius E (2004) Diagnostic genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in cancer patients: women’s looking back on the pre-test period and a psychological evaluation. Genet Test 8(1):13–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  159. Low CA, Bower JE, Kwan L, Seldon J (2008) Benefit finding in response to BRCA1/2 testing. Ann Behav Med 35(1):61–69

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ, Brocker-Vriends AH, van Asperen CJ, Sijmons RH et al (2007) Comparison of individuals opting for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC genetic susceptibility testing with regard to coping, illness perceptions, illness experiences, family system characteristics and hereditary cancer distress. Patient Educ Couns 65(1):58–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ, Brocker-Vriends AH, van Asperen CJ, Sijmons RH et al (2007) The common sense model of self-regulation and psychological adjustment to predictive genetic testing: a prospective study. Psychooncology 16(12):1121–1129

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  162. Manne S, Audrain J, Schwartz M, Main D, Finch C, Lerman C (2004) Associations between relationship support and psychological reactions of participants and partners to BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in a clinic-based sample. Ann Behav Med 28(3):211–225

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ, Brocker-Vriends AH, van Asperen CJ, Sijmons RH et al (2007) Family system characteristics and psychological adjustment to cancer susceptibility genetic testing: a prospective study. Clin Genet 71(1):35–42

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ, Brocker-Vriends AH, van Asperen CJ, Sijmons RH et al (2006) Experience of parental cancer in childhood is a risk factor for psychological distress during genetic cancer susceptibility testing. Ann Oncol 17(7): 1090–1095

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Daly PA, Nolan C, Green A, Ormiston W, Cody N, McDevitt T et al (2003) Predictive testing for BRCA1 and 2 mutations: a male contribution. Ann Oncol 14(4):549–553

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  166. Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Phillippe K, Tejpar S et al (2005) Predictive testing for hereditary non polyposis colorectal cancer. Subjective perception regarding colorectal and endometrial cancer, distress and health-related behaviour at one year post-test. Genet Test 9(1):54–65

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  167. Codori A, Zawacki K, Petersen G, Miglioretti D, Bacon J, Trimbath J et al (2003) Genetic testing for hereditary colorectal cancer in children: Long term psychological effects. Am J Med Genet A 116A(117):128

    Google Scholar 

  168. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) (2009) http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfix.htm

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Jane M. Blazeby

  2. Division of Surgery, Head & Neck, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, BS2 8HW, UK

    Jane M. Blazeby

Authors
  1. Robert N. Whistance
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shelley Potter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark Eveleigh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jane M. Blazeby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane M. Blazeby .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , MRC Cancer Cell Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB20XZ, United Kingdom

    Rebecca C. Fitzgerald

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Whistance, R.N., Potter, S., Eveleigh, M., Blazeby, J.M. (2011). Psychosocial Outcomes of Screening for Cancer and Pre-invasive Disease. In: Fitzgerald, R. (eds) Pre-Invasive Disease: Pathogenesis and Clinical Management. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6694-0_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation