American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gramling, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Vidrine, J. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, Vol. 1, No. 1, 54-58 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1559827606295453
© 2007 SAGE Publications

Reviews

Risk Communication During Screening for Genomic Breast Cancer Susceptibility

Robert E. Gramling, MD

Brown University Center for Primary Care and Prevention, Pawtucket, Rhode Island, robert_gramling{at}brown.edu

Jennifer Irvin Vidrine, PhD

University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston

Screening for genomic predisposition to diseases of adulthood is emerging in standard medical practice. Breast cancer predisposition testing provides a useful example for understanding the potential implications of risk-related screening in practice. Risk is an important and complex psychological construct that is understood differently both between scientific disciplines and between medical and lay persons. The process of establishing thresholds for classifying whether one's risk reaches levels warranting departure from standard preventive strategies is an important predictor of both physician feedback and patient interpretation of their risk. Messages about genomic breast cancer risk arising during the pedigree screening context are conveyed via explicit and implicit modes of communication. Best practices for communicating about genomic risk and the implications for health disparities related to screening for genomic susceptibility remain unknown. More work is urgently needed given the societal forces that are catalyzing population-based screening for genomic predisposition into the routine practice of preventive medicine.

Key Words: screening • genetics • risk communication • breast cancer • primary care

References

  • Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, et al. Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 2001;409: 860-921.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Venter JC, Adams MD, Myers EW, et al. The sequence of the human genome. Science. 2001;291: 1304-1351.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Petersen A. Biofantasies: genetics and medicine in the print news media. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52: 1255-1268.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Gollust SE, Hull SC, Wilfond BS. Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. JAMA. 2002;288: 1762-1767.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • InterGenetics I. OncoVue breast cancer risk test. Available at: http://www.inter-genetics.com/intergenetics/oncovue.html. Accessed July 31, 2006.
  • Fetters MD, Doukas DJ, Phan KL. Family physicians' perspectives on genetics and the human genome project. Clin Genet. 1999;56: 28-34.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Collins FS. Shattuck lecture—medical and societal consequences of the Human Genome Project. N Engl J Med. 1999;341: 28-37.[Free Full Text]
  • Karanjawala ZE, Collins FS. Genetics in the context of medical practice. JAMA. 1998;280: 1533-1534.[Free Full Text]
  • Coughlin SS, Miller DS. Public health perspectives on testing for colorectal cancer susceptibility genes. Am J Prev Med. 1999;16: 99-104.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Coughlin SS, Hall IJ. A review of genetic polymorphisms and prostate cancer risk. Ann Epidemiol. 2002;12: 182-196.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Coughlin SS, Khoury MJ, Steinberg KK. BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations and risk of breast cancer: public health perspectives. Am J Prev Med. 1999;16: 91-98.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Khoury MJ. Genetic epidemiology and the future of disease prevention and public health. Epidemiol Rev. 1997;19: 175-180.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kauff ND, Satagopan JM, Robson ME, et al. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med. 2002;346: 1609-1615.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Meijers-Heijboer H, van Geel B, van Putten WL, et al. Breast cancer after prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(3): 159-164.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • King MC, Wieand S, Hale K, et al. Tamoxifen and breast cancer incidence among women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP-P1) Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. JAMA. 2001;286: 2251-2256.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Carroll JC, Heisey RE, Warner E, Goel V, McCready DR. Hereditary breast cancer: psychosocial issues and family physicians' role. Can Fam Physician. 1999;45: 126-132.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Heisey RE, Carroll JC, Warner E, McCready DR, Goel V. Hereditary breast cancer: identifying and managing BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Can Fam Physician. 1999;45: 114-124.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Warner E, Heisey RE, Goel V, Carroll JC, McCready DR. Hereditary breast cancer: risk assessment of patients with a family history of breast cancer. Can Fam Physician. 1999;45: 104-112.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • de Bock GH, Vlieland TP, Hakkeling M, Kievit J, Springer MP. GPs' management of women seeking help for familial breast cancer. Fam Pract. 1999;16: 463-467.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Watson E, Austoker J, Lucassen A. A study of GP referrals to a family cancer clinic for breast/ovarian cancer. Fam Pract. 2001;18: 131-134.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Lucassen A, Watson E, Harcourt J, Rose P, O'Grady J. Guidelines for referral to a regional genetics service: GPs respond by referring more appropriate cases. Fam Pract. 2001;18: 135-140.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Braithwaite D, Sutton S, Smithson WH, Emery J. Internet-based risk assessment and decision support for the management of familial cancer in primary care: a survey of GPs' attitudes and intentions. Fam Pract. 2002;19: 587-590.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Emery J, Walton R, Coulson A, Glasspool D, Ziebland S, Fox J. Computer support for recording and interpreting family histories of breast and ovarian cancer in primary care (RAGs): qualitative evaluation with simulated patients. BMJ. 1999;319: 32-36.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Westman J, Hampel H, Bradley T. Efficacy of a touchscreen computer based family cancer history questionnaire and subsequent cancer risk assessment. J Med Genet 2000;37: 354-360.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Coulson AS, Glasspool DW, Fox J, Emery J. RAGs: a novel approach to computerized genetic risk assessment and decision support from pedigrees. Methods Inf Med. 2001;40: 315-322.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Family history as a tool for public health and preventive medicine. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/info/conference/famhist.htm. Accessed February 21, 2006.
  • Breast cancer risk assessment tool. Available at: http://bcra.nci.nih.gov/brc/. Accessed March 10, 2002.
  • Becker MHE. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2-2.
  • Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: a decade later. Health Educ Q. 1984;11: 1-47.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1980.
  • Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991;50: 179-211.[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Rogers RW. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology. 1975;91: 93-114.
  • Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippinott-Raven; 1998.
  • Weinstein ND. What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25: 15-20.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Sulls J, Wallston KA, eds. Social Psychological Foundations of Health and Illness. Malden, Mass: Blackwell; 2003.
  • Reventlow S, Hvas AC, Tulinius C. "In really great danger." The concept of risk in general practice. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2001;19: 71-75.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Welch HG. Risk communication in clinical practice: putting cancer in context. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25: 124-133.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Hoffrage U, Lindsey S, Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G. Medicine: communicating statistical information. Science. 2000;290: 2261-2262.[Free Full Text]
  • Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. Risk charts: putting cancer in context. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94: 799-804.[Free Full Text]
  • Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Marketing medicine to the public: a reader's guide. JAMA. 2002;287: 774-775.[Free Full Text]
  • Rothman AJ, Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. Psychol Bull. 1997;121: 3-19.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Dorland WAN, ed. Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary. 28th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: W. B. Saunders; 1994.
  • Wilson J, Jungner G. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1968.
  • Wald N, Cuckle H. Reporting the assessment of screening and diagnostic tests. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1989;96: 389-396.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Haddow JE, Palomaki GE. ACCE: a model process for evaluating data on emerging genetic tests. In: Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W, eds. Human Genome Epidemiology: A Scientific Foundation for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2003.
  • Emery J, Rose P. Expanding the role of the family history in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 1999;49: 260-261.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Khoury MJ. Genetics and genomics in practice: the continuum from genetic disease to genetic information in health and disease. Genet Med. 2003;5: 261-268.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rich EC, Burke W, Heaton CJ, et al. Reconsidering the family history in primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19: 273-280.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Scheuner MT, Wang SJ, Raffel LJ, Larabell SK, Rotter JI. Family history: a comprehensive genetic risk assessment method for the chronic conditions of adulthood. Am J Med Genet. 1997;71: 315-324.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Palomaki GE, McClain MR, Steinort K, Sifri R, LoPresti L, Haddow JE. Screen-positive rates and agreement among six family history screening protocols for breast/ovarian cancer in a population-based cohort of 21- to 55-year-old women. Genet Med. 2006;8: 161-168.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Carmona RH, Wattendorf DJ. Personalizing prevention: the U.S. Surgeon General's Family History Initiative. Am Fam Physician. 2005;71: 36-39.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Aston CE, Ralph DA, Lalo DP, et al. Oligogenic combinations associated with breast cancer risk in women under 53 years of age. Hum Genet. 2005;116: 208-221.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. The seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003;289: 2560-2572.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Executive summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001;285: 2486-2497.[Free Full Text]
  • Gramling R, Duffy C, David S. Does providing hereditary breast cancer risk assessment support to practicing physicians decrease the likelihood of them discussing such risk with their patients? Genet Med. 2004;6: 542-542.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Gramling R, Irvin JE, Nash J, Sciamanna C, Culpepper L. Numeracy and medicine: key family physician attitudes about communicating probability with patients. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2004;17: 473-473.
  • Gramling R, Anthony D, Simmons E, Bowen D. Self-rated breast cancer risk among women reporting a 1st degree family history of breast cancer on office screening questionnaires in routine medical care: the role of physician-delivered risk feedback. Genet Med. In press.
  • Acheson LS, Wiesner GL, Zyzanski SJ, Goodwin MA, Stange KC. Family history-taking in community family practice: implications for genetic screening. Genet Med. 2000;2: 180-185.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1980.
  • McCaul KD, Branstetter AD, Schroeder DM, Glasgow RE. What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health Psychol. 1996;15: 423-429.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Katapodi MC, Lee KA, Facione NC, Dodd MJ. Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: a meta-analytic review. Prev Med. 2004;38: 388-402.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Vernon SW. Risk perception and risk communication for cancer screening behaviors: a review. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;25: 101-119.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353: 1784-1792.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Feig SA. Effect of service screening mammography on population mortality from breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;95: 451-457.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Facts and Figures 2005. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2005.
  • Cancer Facts and Figures for African Americans 2005-2006. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2005.
  • Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Lurie N, et al. Does utilization of screening mammography explain racial and ethnic differences in breast cancer? Ann Intern Med. 2006;144: 541-553.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gramling, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Vidrine, J. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?