Racial differences in testing motivation and psychological distress following pretest education for BRCA1 gene testing.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a randomized trial to investigate racial differences in response to two alternate pretest education strategies for BRCA1 genetic testing: a standard education model and an education plus counseling (E + C) model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-eight Caucasian women and 70 African American women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer were contacted for a baseline telephone interview to assess sociodemographic characteristics, number of relatives affected with cancer, and race before pretest education. Outcome variables included changes from baseline to 1-month follow-up in cancer-related distress and genetic testing intentions, as well as provision of a blood sample after the education session. RESULTS: African American women were found to differ significantly from Caucasian women in the effects of the interventions on testing intentions and provision of a blood sample. Specifically, in African American women, E + C led to greater increases than education only in intentions to be tested and provision of a blood sample. These effects were independent of socioeconomic status and referral mechanisms. In Caucasian women, there were no differential effects of the interventions on these outcomes. Reductions in cancer-specific distress were evidenced in all study groups. However, this decrease, although not significantly different, was smallest among African American women who received E + C. CONCLUSIONS: In low- to moderate-risk African American women, pretest education and counseling may motivate BRCA1 testing. Further research is needed to explore the mechanisms of impact of the alternate pretest education strategies and to increase the cultural sensitivity of education and counseling protocols.

Patients' attitudes about autonomy and confidentiality in genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility.

The identification of BRCA1 and BRCA2, two breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility genes, has brought many ethical and social issues to the forefront. This paper presents the results of a survey assessing the attitudes of 238 unaffected first-degree relatives of women with breast or ovarian cancer regarding the ethical issues of autonomy and confidentiality as they relate to BRCA1/2 testing. Baseline knowledge about BRCA1/2 and ethnic and psychosocial characteristics of our study population were examined to determine their association with women's attitudes. The majority of women (86-87%) felt that health care providers should not disclose the results of genetic tests for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility to insurance companies or employers without written consent; however, only 56-57% felt that written consent should be required for a spouse or immediate family to receive this information. Ninety-eight percent of the women surveyed agreed that genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer risk should be voluntary. Likewise, most women (95%) agreed that a person should be able to have genetic testing against a doctor's recommendation and 88% of the women surveyed agreed that parents should be able to consent to genetic susceptibility testing on behalf of their minor children. African American women were less concerned than Caucasian women about the protection of confidentiality in families, they were more likely to agree that an individual should still have access to testing when their physicians recommended against it, and they were more supportive of parents' rights to consent to genetic predisposition testing on behalf of their minor children. Women with coping styles characterized by higher optimism were more likely to favor access to genetic testing when a physician recommended against it, and to support parents' rights to consent to testing of their minor children. Therefore, the setting and manner in which genetic counseling and testing are delivered must be appropriately tailored to reflect these attitudinal differences and preferences.