David Main

What you don't know can hurt you: adverse psychologic effects in members of BRCA1-linked and BRCA2-linked families who decline genetic testing.

PURPOSE To identify members of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families who are at risk for adverse psychologic effects of genetic testing. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective cohort study with baseline (preeducation) assessments of predictor variables (ie, sociodemographic factors, cancer history, and cancer-related stress symptoms) was performed. The primary outcome variable (presence of depressive symptoms) was assessed at baseline and at 1- and 6-month follow-up evaluations. Participants were 327 adult male and female members of BRCA1- and BRCA2-linked hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families, who were identified as carriers, noncarriers, or decliners of genetic testing. RESULTS The presence of cancer-related stress symptoms at baseline was strongly predictive of the onset of depressive symptoms in family members who were invited but declined testing. Among persons who reported high baseline levels of stress, depression rates in decliners increased from 26% at baseline to 47% at 1-month follow-up; depression rates in noncarriers decreased and in carriers showed no change (odds ratio [OR] for decliners v noncarriers=8.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9 to 33.5; P=.0004). These significant differences in depression rates were still evident at the 6-month follow-up evaluation (P=.04). CONCLUSION In BRCA1/2-linked families, persons with high levels of cancer-related stress who decline genetic testing may be at risk for depression. These family members may benefit from education and counseling, even if they ultimately elect not to be tested, and should be monitored for potential adverse effects.

Impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Testing on Psychologic Distress in a Clinic-Based Sample

PURPOSE Despite the increasingly widespread availability of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing, little is known about the psychologic impact of such testing in the clinical setting. The objective of this study was to examine the long-term psychologic impact of receiving BRCA1/2 test results within a clinic-based testing program. PATIENTS AND METHODS The participants were 279 high-risk women who underwent genetic counseling and testing for alterations in the BRCA1/2 genes. At baseline (before genetic testing) and at 6 months after the disclosure of mutation status, we measured perceived risk for breast and ovarian cancer, cancer-specific distress, and general distress. We examined the impact of the test result on each of these outcomes at the 6-month follow-up. Analyses were conducted separately for probands and their relatives who were unaffected with cancer. RESULTS We found no effect of test result among affected probands. Among unaffected relatives, we found that participants who received definitive negative test results exhibited significant reductions in perceived risk and distress compared with participants who received positive test results. Importantly, relatives who received positive test results did not exhibit increased distress or perceived risk. CONCLUSION These results suggest that clinic-based BRCA1/2 testing can lead to psychologic benefits for individuals who receive negative test results. At 6 months after disclosure, those who receive positive or uninformative test results do not exhibit increased psychologic distress or perceived risk.

DEPRESSION AND SELF-MEDICATION WITH NICOTINE : THE MODIFYING INFLUENCE OF THE DOPAMINE D4 RECEPTOR GENE

This study evaluated whether there are genetic subgroups of depressed individuals who are more or less predisposed to engage in self-medication smoking practices. Smokers (N = 231) completed self-report questionnaires of depression and smoking practices and were genotyped for the dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) gene. A significant interaction (DRD4 Genotype x Depression) was found for stimulation smoking and negative-affect reduction smoking. Specifically, these smoking practices were significantly heightened in depressed smokers homozygous for the short alleles of DRD4 but not in those heterozygous or homozygous for the long alleles of DRD4. These preliminary results suggest that the rewarding effects of smoking and the beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy for depressed smokers may depend, in part, on genetic factors involved in dopamine transmission.

Interacting effects of the serotonin transporter gene and neuroticism in smoking practices and nicotine dependence

Individual differences in propensity to nicotine dependence appear to be mediated, in part, by genetic factors.1 The serotonin transporter gene has a functional polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) which modulates gene transcription and reuptake.2, 3 A possible role in nicotine dependence is suggested by a link between 5-HTTLPR and neuroticism,4 a personality trait which has been related to smoking practices.5 In a cross-sectional study of 185 smokers, we utilized multiple linear regression modeling to examine the interacting effects of the 5-HTTLPR and neuroticism on smoking practices and nicotine dependence. Genotype was classified according to the presence or absence of the short (s) allele vs the long (l) allele of 5-HTTLPR (ie, s/s or s/l vs l/l). Models controlled for gender, age, race, and alcohol use. The 5-HTTLPR by neuroticism interaction effect was statistically significant in the models of nicotine intake (P = 0.05), nicotine dependence (P = 0.001), and smoking motivations (smoking to reduce negative mood (P = 0.01); smoking for stimulation (P = 0.01)). The results suggested that neuroticism was positively associated with these smoking practices among smokers with 5-HTTLPR S genotypes (s/s or s/l), but not among smokers with the L genotype (l/l). The 5-HTTLPR may modify the effects of neuroticism on smoking motivations and nicotine dependence. Assessment of 5-HTTLPR genotype and neuroticism may help to identify smokers who are more responsive to psychotropic medications, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which are being used in smoking cessation treatment.

Genetic susceptibility testing in smoking-cessation treatment: One-year outcomes of a randomized trial☆☆☆

This study evaluated the long-term impact of genetic susceptibility biomarker feedback on smoking behavior change and symptoms of depression in 426 male and female smokers. Smokers were randomized to one of three smoking-cessation interventions: minimal contact quit-smoking counseling (QSC), QSC + exposure biomarker feedback (EBF), and QSC + EBF + biomarker feedback about genetic susceptibility to lung cancer (SBF). The logistic regression model for quit attempt revealed a significant main effect for treatment such that participants in the SBF group were more than two times more likely to make a quit attempt than participants in the QSC group. There was not a significant difference between EBF and QSC participants. The results also revealed a significant effect for baseline stage of change. Those smokers in the preparation stage at baseline were more than three times more likely to make a quit attempt over the 12 months following treatment. The models for 30-day cessation and follow-up smoking rate revealed no significant main or interacting effects for treatment. A repeated measures analysis of variance revealed a significant main effect for time, indicating that an initial increase in depression in the genetic susceptibility group was not maintained over time. Genetic susceptibility feedback has the intended effects on motivation to quit, but it may need to be delivered within a more intensive smoking-cessation treatment for the heightened motivation to translate into smoking cessation.

Breast and ovarian cancer screening practices in healthy women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer.

Studies in women with a family history of cancer demonstrate a wide variability in the uptake of cancer screening measures. Little data exist regarding the breast and ovarian cancer screening practices of women who are members of hereditary breast cancer families. In order to address this issue, we examined the screening behaviors and the determinants of screening in a clinic based group of 216 women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer who were participating in a free genetic counseling and testing research program. At baseline, prior to obtaining genetic counseling or testing, 50% of women ages 30–39, 83% of those age 40–49, 69% of those 50–64, and 53% of those ≥65 reported having a mammogram in the prior year. Adherence to mammography recommendations was correlated with age, number of relatives with breast cancer, and income. Twenty percent of participants had at least one CA-125 performed and 31% had ever obtained a screening ultrasound. Having at least one relative with ovarian cancer was very strongly associated with ovarian cancer screening [OR = 12.3, 95% CI = 4.6–33 for CA-125; OR = 4.9, 95% CI = 2.4,10.1 for ultrasound]. No association between cancer worries/distress and either breast or ovarian cancer screening was found. In conclusion, the breast and ovarian screening uptake in healthy women from hereditary breast cancer families is suboptimal, even for women over age 50, for whom annual mammography is clearly indicated. These findings indicate a need for better education about screening guidelines for high-risk women.