PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J Stopfer

Publications and source records attributed to J Stopfer.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Anticipated versus actual emotional reactions to disclosure of results of genetic tests for cancer susceptibility: findings from p53 and BRCA1 testing programs.

PURPOSE: We examined the ability of individuals undergoing genetic testing for cancer susceptibility in two structured research protocols to accurately anticipate emotional reactions to disclosure of their test result. We explored whether accuracy of emotional anticipation was associated with postdisclosure psychologic adjustment. METHODS: Data from 65 individuals were analyzed; 24 members of Li-Fraumeni cancer syndrome families were tested for p53 mutations (all 24 were unaffected), and 41 subjects with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility were tested for BRCA1 mutations (34 were unaffected and seven were affected). Subjects were from families in which a germline mutation had been previously identified. At the pretest session, subjects rated the extent to which they anticipated feeling each of six emotional states (relief, happiness, sadness, guilt, anger, and worry) after disclosure that they did or did not carry the familial mutation. After receiving their test result, they rated their feelings on the same scale of emotions for the appropriate condition. Extent of accuracy and association with psychologic distress at 6 months, as assessed with standardized measures, were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, mean levels of emotional reactions after receiving test results were not different from those anticipated before result disclosure. However, affected BRCA1 carriers experienced higher levels of anger and worry than they had anticipated. Underestimation of subsequent distress emotions related to test result was associated with a significant increase in general psychologic distress at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Unaffected individuals in cancer-predisposition testing programs are generally accurate in anticipating emotional reactions to test results. However, cancer patients may underestimate their distress after disclosure of positive results and could benefit from intervention strategies.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Factors associated with decisions about clinical BRCA1/2 testing.

Testing for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 can provide important information about breast and ovarian cancer risk to a small but identifiable subgroup of women. Women who test positive for a BRCA1/2 mutation can pursue more aggressive cancer surveillance and prevention regimens. Among families with known mutations, women who test negative may avoid unnecessary interventions. Currently, little is known about the factors associated with the use of clinical BRCA1/2 testing. The objective of this study was to determine the factors associated with decisions about clinical BRCA1/2 testing among women undergoing clinical BRCA1/2 counseling through a retrospective cohort study of women who participated in a university-based clinic offering breast cancer risk assessment, genetic counseling, and BRCA1/2 testing between January 1996 and April 1998. From the 251 eligible women who responded to a follow-up survey, 125 (50%) had undergone or were undergoing BRCA1/2 testing, 86 (34%) had decided not to undergo testing, and 40 (16%) were undecided about testing. After multivariate adjustment, we found that women who chose to undergo BRCA1/2 testing were more likely to have a known familial mutation [odds ratio (OR), 7.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.97-62.16], more likely to be Ashkenazi Jewish (OR, 6.37; 95% CI, 2.68-15.12), more likely to want cancer risk information for family members (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.99-4.14), more likely to want information about ovarian cancer risk (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.18-3.69), and less likely to be concerned about insurance or job discrimination (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.21-0.94). These associations were also found in the subgroup of women with a predicted probability of a BRCA1 mutation of 25%. Our study suggests that approximately half of eligible women choose to undergo clinical BRCA1/2 testing after participating in counseling. Women who have the highest risk of carrying a mutation, and thus the greatest probability of gaining some useful information from the test results, are most likely to undergo testing. Women who undergo testing are also more interested in ovarian cancer risk information and less concerned about job and insurance discrimination.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

BRCA1 mutations in women attending clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: To define the incidence of BRCA1 mutations among patients seen in clinics that evaluate the risk of breast cancer, we analyzed DNA samples from women seen in this setting and constructed probability tables to provide estimates of the likelihood of finding a BRCA1 mutation in individual families. METHODS: Clinical information, family histories, and blood for DNA analysis were obtained from 263 women with breast cancer. Conformation-sensitive gel electrophoresis and DNA sequencing were used to identify BRCA1 mutations. RESULTS: BRCA1 mutations were identified in 16 percent of women with a family history of breast cancer. Only 7 percent of women from families with a history of breast cancer but not ovarian cancer had BRCA1 mutations. The rates were higher among women from families with a history of both breast and ovarian cancer. Among family members, an average age of less than 55 years at the diagnosis of breast cancer, the presence of ovarian cancer, the presence of breast and ovarian cancer in the same woman, and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry were all associated with an increased risk of detecting a BRCA1 mutation. No association was found between the presence of bilateral breast cancer or the number of breast cancers in a family and the detection of a BRCA1 mutation, or between the position of the mutation in the BRCA1 gene and the presence of ovarian cancer in a family. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with breast cancer and a family history of the disease, the percentage with BRCA1 coding-region mutations is less than the 45 percent predicted by genetic-linkage analysis. These results suggest that even in a referral clinic specializing in screening women from high-risk families, the majority of tests for BRCA1 mutations will be negative and therefore uninformative.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Establishing a cancer risk evaluation program.

PURPOSE: Presymptomatic genetic testing for cancer susceptibility is a new practice arena that raises many complex issues. This article presents one model of a cancer risk evaluation program that specifically addresses the unique issues associated with genetic testing for cancer risk. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM: The Cancer Risk Evaluation Program is designed to care for any individual concerned about his or her risk for cancer, offering predisposition genetic testing if appropriate. The program includes clinical and psychosocial assessment, education, cancer risk analysis, and genetic counseling; it offers long-term screening and surveillance and provides a forum for ongoing genetic and clinical research. RESULTS: Program evaluations from participants have shown that the program is successfully meeting the needs of the participants. This program also ensures that the University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center is delivering cancer genetic services consistent with the existing position statements on genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, which have included guidelines and indications for predisposition genetic testing and informed consent. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Researchers anticipate a substantial demand for predisposition genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. However, not all individuals interested in testing are eligible or willing to undergo direct gene analysis because of the potential risks. Therefore, clinical programs must address the complex issues surrounding presymptomatic genetic testing and incorporate cancer risk assessment strategies. Additionally, healthcare providers in this new practice arena should be fully informed and current in the state of the knowledge regarding cancer risk assessment; predisposition genetic testing; and the ethical, legal, and social issues pertaining to cancer risk assessment and management.

Adult↗