Dataset Information

Psychosocial Impact of Predictive Genetic Testing in Hereditary Heart Diseases: The PREDICT Study.

ABSTRACT: Predictive genetic testing (PGT) is offered to asymptomatic relatives at risk of hereditary heart disease, but the impact of result disclosure has been little studied. We evaluated the psychosocial impacts of PGT in hereditary heart disease, using self-report questionnaires (including the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) in 517 adults, administered three times to the prospective cohort (PCo: n = 264) and once to the retrospective cohort (RCo: n = 253). The main motivations for undergoing PGT were "to remove doubt" and "for their children". The level of anxiety increased between pre-test and result appointments (p <0.0001), returned to baseline after the result (PCo), and was moderately elevated at 4.4 years (RCo). Subjects with a history of depression or with high baseline anxiety were more likely to develop anxiety after PGT result (p = 0.004 and p <0.0001, respectively), whatever it was. Unfavourable changes in professional and/or family life were observed in 12.4% (PCo) and 18.7% (RCo) of subjects. Few regrets about PGT were expressed (0.8% RCo, 2.3% PCo). Medical benefit was not the main motivation, which emphasises the role of pre/post-test counselling. When PGT was performed by expert teams, the negative impact was modest, but careful management is required in specific categories of subjects, whatever the genetic test result.

SUBMITTER: Bordet C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7290753 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychosocial Impact of Predictive Genetic Testing in Hereditary Heart Diseases: The PREDICT Study.

Bordet Céline C Brice Sandrine S Maupain Carole C Gandjbakhch Estelle E Isidor Bertrand B Palmyre Aurélien A Moerman Alexandre A Toutain Annick A Akloul Linda L Brehin Anne-Claire AC Sawka Caroline C Rooryck-Thambo Caroline C Schaefer Elise E Nguyen Karine K Dupin Deguine Delphine D Rouzier Cécile C Billy Gipsy G Séné Krystelle K Denjoy Isabelle I Leheup Bruno B Planes Marc M Mazzella Jean-Michael JM Staraci Stéphanie S Hebert Mélanie M Le Boette Elsa E Michon Claire-Cécile CC Babonneau Marie-Lise ML Curjol Angélique A Bekhechi Amine A Mansouri Rafik R Raji Ibticem I Pruny Jean-François JF Fressart Véronique V Ader Flavie F Richard Pascale P Tezenas du Montcel Sophie S Gargiulo Marcela M Charron Philippe P

Journal of clinical medicine 20200506 5

Predictive genetic testing (PGT) is offered to asymptomatic relatives at risk of hereditary heart disease, but the impact of result disclosure has been little studied. We evaluated the psychosocial impacts of PGT in hereditary heart disease, using self-report questionnaires (including the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) in 517 adults, administered three times to the prospective cohort (PCo: <i>n</i> = 264) and once to the retrospective cohort (RCo: <i>n</i> = 253). The main motivations for underg ...[more]

PMID: 32384747

Similar Datasets

Project description:This multi-centre UK study assesses the impact of predictive testing for breast and ovarian cancer predisposition genes (BRCA1/2) in the clinical context. In the year following predictive testing, 261 adults (59 male) from nine UK genetics centres participated; 91 gene mutation carriers and 170 noncarriers. Self-report questionnaires were completed at baseline (pre-genetic testing) and 1, 4 and 12 months following the genetic test result. Men were assessed for general mental health (by general health questionnaire (GHQ)) and women for general mental health, cancer-related worry, intrusive and avoidant thoughts, perception of risk and risk management behaviour. Main comparisons were between female carriers and noncarriers on all measures and men and women for general mental health. Female noncarriers benefited psychologically, with significant reductions in cancer-related worry following testing (P<0.001). However, younger female carriers (<50 years) showed a rise in cancer-related worry 1 month post-testing (P<0.05). This returned to pre-testing baseline levels 12 months later, but worry remained significantly higher than noncarriers throughout (P<0.01). There were no significant differences in GHQ scores between males and females (both carriers and noncarriers) at any time point. Female carriers engaged in significantly more risk management strategies than noncarriers in the year following testing (e.g. mammograms; 92% carriers vs 30% noncarriers). In the 12 months post-testing, 28% carriers had bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy and 31% oophorectomy. Oophorectomy was confined to older (mean 41 yrs) women who already had children. However, worry about cancer was not assuaged by surgery following genetic testing, and this requires further investigation. In all, 20% of female carriers reported insurance problems. The data show persistent worry in younger female gene carriers and confirm changes in risk management consistent with carrier status. Men were not adversely affected by genetic testing in terms of their general mental health.

Project description:This study, conducted by NHGRI and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, will develop statistical approaches for modeling family social structure and apply these models to explore the role of family social structure in participation in genetic testing and counseling, disclosure of test results and adjustment to risk status. With recent genetic advances and the ability to test for hereditary illnesses, methods that provide an understanding of the family social structure and how that structure affects the dissemination of genetic risk information are increasingly important. The data for this study were collected by the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center as part of a study on family communication and family functioning with regard to genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC). Relatives of people with HNPCC are more likely than the general population to get colon cancer and other types of cancer if they have inherited the gene alteration (mutation) that predisposes to the disease. This alteration can be passed on from a parent to some or all of his or her children. In the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center study, telephone interviews were conducted with 80 adult members of 16 extended families with a known gene alteration predisposing for HNPCC. These participants included people who had been diagnosed with an HNPCC syndrome cancer, their unaffected family members who were at risk of carrying a gene mutation for HNPCC, and their spouses. Participants were interviewed about their feelings, moods, coping style, and relationships with their spouse, relatives, and friends, about their willingness to have genetic testing, and about their feelings and beliefs about colon cancer, cancer screening and genetic testing and counseling. Some participants were asked about their family communication style and how the family coped with the idea of genetic testing and with the results, if testing was done. The information obtained from the current study may help facilitate family participation, communication and psychological adjustment regarding risk information about genetic diseases.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The risk of metastases in uveal melanoma can accurately be estimated through genetic analysis of the tumor. A growing number of patients decide to receive information on their prognosis, although this can be extremely burdensome. Studies on the psychosocial impact of testing are sparse. The objective of this study was to examine traits of patients opting for prognostication, to investigate its psychosocial impact and the use of psycho-oncological services over time. We further examined characteristics of patients utilizing these services and risk factors of prolonged psychological distress. DESIGN AND METHODS:This study is a non-randomized controlled prospective clinical observational trial. Patients availing for prognostication formed the test group, while those who opted out constituted the observational group. The psychosocial impact of genetic testing was assessed with the following variables: resilience, social support, fear of tumor progression, depression, general distress, health-related quality of life, estimation of the perceived risk, and the utilization of psycho-oncological interventions. Data were assessed at five different time points over a period of 12?months. We applied binary logistic regression analysis, multiple linear regressions and a mixed model. RESULTS:Of 175 patients, 63 decided to obtain prognostic information. Treatment method (enucleation > brachytherapy), lower social support and higher general distress could significantly predict patient's choice for prognostic testing. After result announcement, perceived risk of metastases was significantly increased in patients with poor prognosis, while it decreased in those with good prognosis. Overall, a significant decrease over time appeared concerning fear of progression, general distress, depression and anxiety. Mental quality of life increased over time. The utilization of psycho-oncological interventions increased significantly after prognostication; however, this was equivalent in the test and observational groups. Female sex, higher general distress and higher anxiety predicted greater use of psycho-oncological interventions. DISCUSSION:Availing of prognostic testing is not associated with poorer subsequent psychological well-being. It rather may help to alleviate distress and promote a more realistic risk perception. However, psychological support should be available to all patients, independent of prognosis and treatment, especially considering that patients with low social support and high distress increasingly opt for prognostication.

Project description:PurposeThe clinical features of autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) can resemble and be difficult to differentiate from inherited retinal degenerations (IRDs). Misdiagnosis of an IRD as AIR causes unnecessary treatment with immunosuppressive agents. The purpose of this study is to calculate the predictive value of genetic testing for IRDs in patients with suspected AIR and provide clinical examples where genetic testing has been useful.MethodsWe identified patients seen at MEEI between April 2013 and January 2017 for whom the differentiation of AIR vs. IRDs was difficult based on clinical assessment alone. All patients had some atypical features for AIR, but tested positive for anti-retinal antibodies. Within this group, we identified six patients who had genetic testing for IRDs with the Genetic Eye Disease panel for retinal genes (GEDi-R). We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of genetic testing in a population with approximately equal numbers of IRD and AIR patients.ResultsSix patients had clinical features that made distinguishing between IRDs and AIR on a clinical basis difficult and were sent for genetic testing: four women and two men with a mean age of 59.5 years. In two of these six patients, genetic diagnoses were made based upon the identification of known pathogenic variants in the common IRD genes USH2A and RHO. Two patients had variants of unknown significance within genes associated with IRDs, and the other two had no relevant genetic findings. Given the 60% sensitivity and 3% false positive rate for GEDi-R testing and assuming a 50% pre-test probability of having an IRD, the PPV for GEDi-R for detecting IRD is 95.2% and the NPV is 70.8%.Conclusions and importanceIn patients for whom the differential diagnosis of AIR and IRDs is unclear based on clinical information, genetic testing can be a valuable tool when it identifies an IRD, sparing the patient unnecessary immunosuppressive treatment. However, the test has a low NPV so a negative genetic testing result does not confidently exclude IRD as the true diagnosis.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding service user preferences is key to effective health care decision making and efficient resource allocation. It is of particular importance in the management of high-risk patients in whom predictive genetic testing can alter health outcomes.PurposeThis review aims to identify the relative importance and willingness to pay for attributes of genetic testing in hereditary cancer syndromes.Data sourcesSearches were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, and EconLit using discrete choice experiment (DCE) terms combined with terms related to hereditary cancer syndromes, malignancy synonyms, and genetic testing.Study selectionFollowing independent screening by 3 reviewers, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, being a DCE investigating patient or public preferences related to predictive genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.Data extractionExtracted data included study and respondent characteristics, DCE attributes and levels, methods of data analysis and interpretation, and key study findings.Data synthesisStudies covered colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer syndromes. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis and the quality assessed using the Lancsar and Louviere framework.LimitationsThis review focuses only on DCE design and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes rather than other complex diseases. Challenges also arose from heterogeneity in attributes and levels.ConclusionsTest effectiveness and detection rates were consistently important to respondents and thus should be prioritized by policy makers. Accuracy, cost, and wait time, while also important, showed variation between studies, although overall reduction in cost may improve uptake. Patients and the public would be willing to pay for improved detection and clinician over insurance provider involvement. Future studies should seek to contextualize findings by considering the impact of sociodemographic characteristics, health system coverage, and insurance policies on preferences.HighlightsTest effectiveness and detection rates are consistently important to respondents in genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.Reducing the cost of genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes may improve uptake.Individuals are most willing to pay for a test that improves detection rates, identifies multiple cancers, and for which results are shared with a doctor rather than with an insurance provider.

Dataset Information

Psychosocial Impact of Predictive Genetic Testing in Hereditary Heart Diseases: The PREDICT Study.

Publications

Psychosocial Impact of Predictive Genetic Testing in Hereditary Heart Diseases: The PREDICT Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets