4.6 Article

Psychological functioning in persons considering genetic counseling and testing for Li-Fraumeni syndrome

Journal

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages 783-789

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/pon.1352

Keywords

p53; Li-Fraumeni; cancer; oncology; psychosocial

Funding

  1. American Cancer Society [MRSGT-04-204-01-CPHHPS]
  2. National Cancer Institute
  3. National Institutes of Health [CA34936]
  4. Kleberg Human Cancer Genetics Development Award
  5. Anderson Cancer Center [5 P30 CA016672]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) confers an increased risk of multiple types of cancer in both children and adults. Clinical genetic testing for deleterious germline p53 gene mutations can identify most LFS-affected families. We evaluated factors associated with cancer-specific distress and perceived self-efficacy in coping with a positive genetic test result among persons at risk of having deleterious p53 mutations. Methods: One hundred thirty-five persons from 15 LFS-affected families were invited to take part in a study that offered p53 genetic counseling and testing and to complete psychosocial measures. Results: Participants (n = 92) were more likely, to be younger and female than nonparticipants (n = 43). In multivariate analyses, greater cancer-specific distress was associated with having a lower quality, of life, a higher perceived risk of having a p53 mutation, no personal history, of cancer and a greater number of first degree relatives (FDRs) affected with cancer. Lower perceived self-efficacy, in coping with a positive test result was associated with greater cancer worry, higher decisional conflict about p53 testing and having no personal history of cancer. Conclusions: Individual perceptions about cancer risk and p53 genetic testing, as well as personal experience with FDRs' cancer diagnoses and deaths, should be addressed during the counseling and testing process for LFS-affected families. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available