PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of brjcancerBJC HomepageBJC Advance online publicationBJC Current IssueSubmitting an article to BJCWeb feeds
 
Br J Cancer. 1999 February; 79(5-6): 868–874.
PMCID: PMC2362694

The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception and mental health in women with a family history of breast cancer

Abstract

The present study investigated: (1) perception of genetic risk and, (2) the psychological effects of genetic counselling in women with a family history of breast cancer. Using a prospective design, with assessment pre- and post-genetic counselling at clinics and by postal follow-up at 1, 6 and 12 months, attenders at four South London genetic clinics were assessed. Participants included 282 women with a family history of breast cancer. Outcome was measured in terms of mental health, cancer-specific distress and risk perception. High levels of cancer-specific distress were found pre-genetic counselling, with 28% of participants reporting that they worried about breast cancer ‘frequently or constantly’ and 18% that worry about breast cancer was ‘a severe or definite problem’. Following genetic counselling, levels of cancer-specific distress were unchanged. General mental health remained unchanged over time (33% psychiatric cases detected pre-genetic counselling, 27% at 12 months after genetic counselling). Prior to their genetics consultation, participants showed poor knowledge of their lifetime risk of breast cancer since there was no association between their perceived lifetime risk (when they were asked to express this as a 1 in x odds ratio) and their actual risk, when the latter was calculated by the geneticist at the clinic using the CASH model. In contrast, women were more accurate about their risk of breast cancer pre-genetic counselling when this was assessed in broad categorical terms (i.e. very much lower/very much higher than the average woman) with a significant association between this rating and the subsequently calculated CASH risk figure (P= 0.001). Genetic counselling produced a modest shift in the accuracy of perceived lifetime risk, expressed as an odds ratio, which was maintained at 12 months' follow-up. A significant minority failed to benefit from genetic counselling; 77 women continued to over-estimate their risk and maintain high levels of cancer-related worry. Most clinic attenders were inaccurate in their estimates of the population risk of breast cancer with only 24% able to give the correct figure prior to genetic counselling and 36% over-estimating this risk. There was some improvement following genetic counselling with 62% able to give the correct figure, but this information was poorly retained and this figure had dropped to 34% by the 1-year follow-up. The study showed that women attending for genetic counselling are worried about breast cancer, with 34% indicating that they had initiated the referral to the genetic clinic themselves. This anxiety is not alleviated by genetic counselling, although women reported that it was less of a problem at follow-up. Women who continue to over-estimate their risk and worry about breast cancer are likely to go on seeking unnecessary screening if they are not reassured. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaign

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (90K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Genetic analysis of breast cancer in the cancer and steroid hormone study. Am J Hum Genet. 1991 Feb;48(2):232–242. [PubMed]
  • Evans DG, Blair V, Greenhalgh R, Hopwood P, Howell A. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1994 Nov;70(5):934–938. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alvarez W. Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med. 1979 May;41(3):209–218. [PubMed]
  • Kash KM, Holland JC, Halper MS, Miller DG. Psychological distress and surveillance behaviors of women with a family history of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992 Jan 1;84(1):24–30. [PubMed]
  • Leonard CO, Chase GA, Childs B. Genetic counseling: a consumers' view. N Engl J Med. 1972 Aug 31;287(9):433–439. [PubMed]
  • Lerman C, Schwartz M. Adherence and psychological adjustment among women at high risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1993 Nov;28(2):145–155. [PubMed]
  • Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Boyce A, Jepson C, Engstrom PF. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 1991 Apr 15;114(8):657–661. [PubMed]
  • Lloyd S, Watson M, Waites B, Meyer L, Eeles R, Ebbs S, Tylee A. Familial breast cancer: a controlled study of risk perception, psychological morbidity and health beliefs in women attending for genetic counselling. Br J Cancer. 1996 Aug;74(3):482–487. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • May S. Patient satisfaction and the detection of psychiatric morbidity in general practice. Fam Pract. 1992 Mar;9(1):76–81. [PubMed]
  • Morris T, Greer S. Psychological characteristics of women electing to attend a breast screening clinic. Clin Oncol. 1982 Jun;8(2):113–119. [PubMed]
  • Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, Futreal PA, Harshman K, Tavtigian S, Liu Q, Cochran C, Bennett LM, Ding W, et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science. 1994 Oct 7;266(5182):66–71. [PubMed]
  • Watson M, Duvivier V, Wade Walsh M, Ashley S, Davidson J, Papaikonomou M, Murday V, Sacks N, Eeles R. Family history of breast cancer: what do women understand and recall about their genetic risk? J Med Genet. 1998 Sep;35(9):731–738. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Wooster R, Bignell G, Lancaster J, Swift S, Seal S, Mangion J, Collins N, Gregory S, Gumbs C, Micklem G. Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. Nature. 1995 Dec 21;378(6559):789–792. [PubMed]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK