Patterns of photoprotection following CDKN2A/p16 genetic test reporting and counseling
ABSTRACT The impact of melanoma genetic testing and counseling on photoprotective behaviors is unknown.
To determine if genetic testing and counseling alter compliance with photoprotection recommendations.
Reported use of sunscreen, protective clothing, and sun avoidance by 59 members of CDKN2A/p16-mutation positive pedigrees was assessed as a function of mutation status and melanoma history, before, immediately after, and 1 month following test reporting.
Intentions to practice all photoprotective behaviors increased in all participant groups (P < .0001). At 1 month, 33% of participants reported the adoption of a new photoprotective behavior. Subpopulation analyses identified different patterns of change in photoprotection relative to baseline (P < .005), with no net decline in any group.
This initial study of CDKN2A/p16 families is small and awaits replication in a larger sample.
Melanoma genetic testing and counseling enhanced intentions to implement photoprotective strategies and did not result in reduced compliance in the CDKN2A/p16-subpopulation.
- SourceAvailable from: Laura B Scheinfeldt[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is currently great interest in using genetic risk estimates for common disease in personalized healthcare. Here we assess melanoma risk-related preventive behavioral change in the context of the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC). As part of on-going reporting activities within the project, participants received a personalized risk assessment including information related to their own self-reported family history of melanoma and a genetic risk variant showing a moderate effect size (1.7, 3.0 respectively for heterozygous and homozygous individuals). Participants who opted to view their report were sent an optional outcome survey assessing risk perception and behavioral change in the months that followed. Participants that report family history risk, genetic risk, or both risk factors for melanoma were significantly more likely to increase skin cancer preventive behaviors when compared to participants with neither risk factor (ORs = 2.04, 2.79, 4.06 and p-values = 0.02, 2.86 × 10-5, 4.67 × 10-5, respectively), and we found the relationship between risk information and behavior to be partially mediated by anxiety. Genomic risk assessments appear to encourage positive behavioral change in a manner that is complementary to family history risk information and therefore may represent a useful addition to standard of care for melanoma prevention.03/2015; 5(1):36-49. DOI:10.3390/jpm5010036
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A CDKN2A/p16 mutation confers 76 % lifetime risk of developing melanoma to US residents, and high-risk individuals are counseled to use sunscreen. Generally, for patients at population risk, gain framing more effectively promotes prevention behaviors; however, it is unknown whether loss frames might more effectively promote behavioral intentions and perceived control over disease risk among high-risk patients. Undergraduates (N = 146) underwent a simulated genetic counseling and test reporting session for hereditary melanoma. Participants watched a video of a genetic counselor providing information in which genetic risk of melanoma (Low: 15 %; High: 76 %) and framed recommendations to use sunscreen (Loss: Risk may increase by 15 % if don't use sunscreen; Gain: Risk may decrease by 15 % if use sunscreen) were manipulated. Controlling for baseline sunscreen use, high-risk participants given loss frames reported greater beliefs that sunscreen would reduce risk than high-risk participants given gain frames. Further, high-risk participants with fair skin tended to report greater intentions to use sunscreen when given loss frames versus gain frames. Perceived control over risk mediated the effect of message frame and disease risk on intentions to use sunscreen. When counseling patients with elevated cancer risk, genetic counselors may consider framing prevention behavioral recommendations in terms of potential losses.Journal of Genetic Counseling 01/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10897-014-9808-2 · 1.75 Impact Factor
- Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 11/2014; 71(5):993-5. DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.04.066 · 5.00 Impact Factor