Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lynch Syndrome: Genetic Counselling of At-Risk Individuals and Families

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
DNA Alterations in Lynch Syndrome

  • 855 Accesses

Abstract

Predictive genetic testing for Lynch syndrome can identify whether or not an individual has inherited a mutation predisposing to a high-risk of cancer. Individuals faced with the decision to test for a future health-related risk require knowledge, not just information, on the genetic contribution to disease in their family. Promoting predictive genetic testing within a framework of genetic counselling allows for the interpretation of complex genetic information so as to facilitate decision-­making, enhance coping mechanisms and promote preventative measures. Individuals who are identified to be mutation-positive can be enrolled into a targeted screening programme to detect colorectal cancer at an early and potentially curable stage while those individuals testing mutation-negative can be released from intensive surveillance. The process of genetic counselling ensures that the psychological meaning of the condition together with the potential impact of the genetic test result is wholly explored ensuring that the individual is capable of coping with a favourable or unfavourable result. This chapter provides an overview of the current literature on predictive testing with regards to theoretical developments in the context of Lynch syndrome. The pre- and post-test counselling sessions are discussed in detail with specific focus on the importance of informed consent, safeguarding an autonomous decision-making process. An update on barriers to uptake of genetic testing, potential emotional and psychological disruption subsequent to testing, and avenues open for future improvement in the profession are addressed. The communication of the test result and implications for the family members, along with the ethical aspects centred on non-disclosure of genetic information, to those at-risk, are also revised.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. American Society of Human Genetics ad Hoc Committee on Genetic Counseling (1975) Genetic counseling. Am J Hum Genet 27:240–242

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fraser FC (1974) Genetic counseling. Am J Hum Genet 26(5):636–659

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kelly TE (1986) Clinical genetics and genetic counselling. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, pp 343–364

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kessler S (1979) Introduction. In: Kessler S (ed) Genetic counseling: psychological dimensions. Academic, New York, pp 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  5. Shiloh S, Saxe L (1989) Perception of recurrence risks by genetic counselees. Psychol Health 3:45–61

    Google Scholar 

  6. Street EC, Soldan J (1998) A conceptual framework for the psychosocial issues faced by families with genetic conditions. Fam Syst Health 16:217–231

    Google Scholar 

  7. Biesecker BB, Peters KF (2001) Process studies in genetic counseling: peering into the black box. Am J Med Genet 106(3):191–198

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Evans C (2006) Genetic counselling: a psychological approach. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Resta R, Biesecker BB, Bennett RL, Blum S, Hahn SE et al (2006) A new definition of genetic counseling: national society of genetic counselors’ task force report. J Genet Couns 15(2):77–83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Resta RG (2006) Defining and redefining the scope and goals of genetic counselling. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 142C(4):269–275

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. UNESCO International Bioethics Committee (1995) Proceedings of the third session. unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001051/105160e.pdf. Accessed May 2012

  12. Bennett RL, Hampel HL, Mandell JB, Marks JH (2003) Genetic counselors: translating genomic science into clinical practice. J Clin Invest 112(9):1274–1279

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pilnick A, Dingwall R (2001) Research directions in genetic counselling: a review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns 44(2):95–105

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Aronson M (2009) Genetic counseling for hereditary colorectal cancer: ethical, legal, and psychosocial issues. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 18(4):669–685

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Baker DL, Schutte JL, Uhlmann WR (1998) A guide to genetic counselling. Wiley-Liss, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Weil J (2000) Psychosocial genetic counselling. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Prucka SK, McIlvried DE, Korf BR (2008) Cancer risk assessment and the genetic counseling process: using hereditary breast and ovarian cancer as an example. Med Princ Pract 17(3):173–189

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bernhardt BA, Biesecker BB, Mastromarino CL (2000) Goals, benefits, and outcomes of genetic counseling: client and genetic counselor assessment. Am J Med Genet 94(3):189–197

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Harper PS (1998) Practical genetic counselling. ButterworthHeinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ensenauer RE, Michels VV, Reinke SS (2005) Genetic testing: practical, ethical, and counseling considerations. Mayo Clin Proc 80(1):63–73

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kessler S (1997) Psychological aspects of genetic counseling. XI. Nondirectiveness revisited. Am J Med Genet 72(2):164–171

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shiloh S (1996) Decision-making in the context of genetic risk. In: Marteau T, Richards M (eds) The troubled helix: the social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  23. Elwyn G, Gray J, Clarke A (2000) Shared decision making and non-directiveness in genetic counselling. J Med Genet 37(2):135–138

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. de Wert G (1998) Ethics of predictive DNA-testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Patient Educ Couns 35(1):43–52

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brain K, Sivell S, Bennert K, Howell L, France L, Jordan S et al (2005) An exploratory comparison of genetic counselling protocols for HNPCC predictive testing. Clin Genet 68(3):255–261

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Evans JP, Skrzynia C, Burke W (2001) The complexities of predictive genetic testing. Br Med J 322(7293):1052–1056

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Järvinen HJ, Aarnio M, Mustonen H, Aktan-Collan K, Aaltonen LA, Peltomaki P et al (2000) Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology 118(5):829–834

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Aktan-Collan K, Haukkala A, Mecklin JP, Uutela A, Kaariainen H (2001) Psychological consequences of predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC): a prospective follow-up study. Int J Cancer 93(4):608–611

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Chapman PD, Burn J (1999) Genetic predictive testing for bowel cancer predisposition: the impact on the individual. Cytogenet Cell Genet 86(2):118–124

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Evers-Kiebooms G, Welkenhuysen M, Claes E, Decruyenaere M, Denayer L (2000) The psychological complexity of predictive testing for late onset neurogenetic diseases and hereditary cancers: implications for multidisciplinary counselling and for genetic education. Soc Sci Med 51(6):831–841

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bleiker EM, Hahn DE, Aaronson NK (2003) Psychosocial issues in cancer genetics-current status and future directions. Acta Oncol 42(4):276–286

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Collins V, Meiser B, Ukoumunne OC, Gaff C, St John DJ, Halliday JL (2007) The impact of predictive genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: three years after testing. Genet Med 9(5):290–297

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Esplen MJ, Madlensky L, Butler K, McKinnon W, Bapat B, Wong J et al (2001) Motivations and psychosocial impact of genetic testing for HNPCC. Am J Med Genet 103(1):9–15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Lerman C, Marshall J, Audrain J, Gomez-Caminero A (1996) Genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: anticipated reactions of patients and challenges to providers. Int J Cancer 69(1):58–61

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Meiser B, Collins V, Warren R, Gaff C, St John DJ, Young MA et al (2004) Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. Clin Genet 66(6):502–511

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Peters JA, Biesecker BB (1997) Genetic counselling and hereditary cancer. Cancer 80(S3):576–586

    Google Scholar 

  37. Trepanier A, Ahrens M, McKinnon W, Peters J, Stopfer J, Grumet SC et al (2004) Genetic cancer risk assessment and counseling: recommendations of the national society of genetic counselors. J Genet Couns 13(2):83–114

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Geller G, Botkin JR, Green MJ, Press N, Biesecker BB, Wilfond B et al (1997) Genetic testing for susceptibility to adult-onset cancer. The process and content of informed consent. JAMA 277(18):1467–1474

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Appelbaum PS, Ludz CW, Meisel A (1987) Informed consent: legal theory and clincal ­practice. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. American Society of Clinical Oncology (1996) Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, adopted on February 20, 1996. J Clin Oncol 14(5):1730–1736

    Google Scholar 

  41. Borry P, Stultiens L, Nys H, Cassiman JJ, Dierickx K (2006) Presymptomatic and predictive genetic testing in minors: a systematic review of guidelines and position papers. Clin Genet 70(5):374–381

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1995) Compliance manual, vol 2, Section 902, Order 915.002. EEOC, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  43. Dorval M, Patenaude AF, Schneider KA, Kieffer SA, DiGianni L, Kalkbrenner KJ et al (2000) Anticipated versus actual emotional reactions to disclosure of results of genetic tests for cancer susceptibility: findings from p53 and BRCA1 testing programs. J Clin Oncol 18(10):2135–2142

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Stupart DA, Goldberg PA, Algar U, Ramesar R (2009) Surveillance colonoscopy improves survival in a cohort of subjects with a single mismatch repair gene mutation. Colorectal Dis 11(2):126–130

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. de Jong AE, Morreau H, Van Puijenbroek M, Eilers PH, Wijnen J, Nagengast FM et al (2004) The role of mismatch repair gene defects in the development of adenomas in patients with HNPCC. Gastroenterology 126(1):42–48

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Beauchamp T, Childress J (2001) Principles of biomedical ethics, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  47. President’s Commission (1983) Screening and counselling for genetic conditions. The ethical, social, and legal implications of genetic screening, counselling, and education programs. US.GPO, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  48. Biesecker BB, Marteau TM (1999) The future of genetic counselling: an international ­perspective. Nat Genet 22(2):133–137

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Raymond VM, Everett JN (2009) Genetic counselling and genetic testing in hereditary gastrointestinal cancer syndromes. Clin Gastroenterol 23(2):275–283

    Google Scholar 

  50. Schneider KA, Chittenden AB, Branda KJ, Keenan MA, Joffe S, Patenaude AF et al (2006) Ethical issues in cancer genetics: whose information is it? J Genet Couns 15(6):491–503

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Offit K, Kohut K, Clagett B, Wadsworth EA, Lafaro KJ, Cummings S et al (2006) Cancer genetic testing and assisted reproduction. J Clin Oncol 24(29):4775–4782

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ashida S, Hadley DW, Vaughn BK, Kuhn NR, Jenkins JF, Koehly LM (2009) The impact of familial environment on depression scores after genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Clin Genet 75(1):43–49

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Legius E (2004) Predictive testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivation, illness representations and short-­term psychological impact. Patient Educ Couns 55(2):265–274

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Murakami Y, Okamura H, Sugano K, Yoshida T, Kazuma K, Akechi T et al (2004) Psychologic distress after disclosure of genetic test results regarding hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 101(2):395–403

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Arver B, Haegermark A, Platten U, Lindblom A, Brandberg Y (2004) Evaluation of psychosocial effects of pre-symptomatic testing for breast/ovarian and colon cancer pre-disposing genes: a 12-month follow-up. Fam Cancer 3(2):109–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Duivenvoorden HJ, Brocker-Vriends AH, van Asperen CJ, Sijmons RH et al (2007) Comparison of individuals opting for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC genetic susceptibility testing with regard to coping, illness perceptions, illness experiences, family system characteristics and hereditary cancer distress. Patient Educ Couns 65(1):58–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Esplen MJ, Urquhart C, Butler K, Gallinger S, Aronson M, Wong J (2003) The experience of loss and anticipation of distress in colorectal cancer patients undergoing genetic testing. J Psychosom Res 55(5):427–435

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Vernon SW, Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Perz CA, Marani S, Amos CI et al (1999) Intention to learn results of genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8(4 Pt 2):353–360

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Esplen MJ, Madlensky L, Aronson M, Rothenmund H, Gallinger S, Butler K et al (2007) Colorectal cancer survivors undergoing genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivational factors and psychosocial functioning. Clin Genet 72(5):394–401

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Vernon SW, Marani SK, Baile WF, Watts BG et al (2005) Psychological impact of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(9):1902–1910

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Vernon SW, Gritz ER, Peterson SK, Amos CI, Perz CA, Baile WF et al (1997) Correlates of psychologic distress in colorectal cancer patients undergoing genetic testing for hereditary colon cancer. Health Psychol 16(1):73–86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Bonadona V, Saltel P, Desseigne F, Mignotte H, Saurin JC, Wang Q et al (2002) Cancer patients who experienced diagnostic genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: reactions and behavior after the disclosure of a positive test result. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 11(1):97–104

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Croyle RT, Lerman C (1993) Interest in genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: cognitive and emotional correlates. Prev Med 22(2):284–292

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Lerman C, Hughes C, Trock BJ, Myers RE, Main D, Bonney A et al (1999) Genetic testing in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. JAMA 281(17):1618–1622

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Hadley DW, Jenkins J, Dimond E, Nakahara K, Grogan L, Liewehr DJ et al (2003) Genetic counseling and testing in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Arch Intern Med 163(5):573–582

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Peterson SK, Watts BG, Koehly LM, Vernon SW, Baile WF, Kohlmann WK et al (2003) How families communicate about HNPCC genetic testing: findings from a qualitative study. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 119C(1):78–86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Aktan-Collan K, Mecklin JP, Jarvinen H, Nystrom-Lahti M, Peltomaki P, Soderling I et al (2000) Predictive genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: uptake and long-term satisfaction. Int J Cancer 89(1):44–50

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Bruwer Z (2011) An investigation into factors which have an impact on access to and utilization of the genetic and endoscopic surveillance clinic offered to high-risk members of known Lynch families. Dissertation, University of Cape Town, Cape Town

    Google Scholar 

  69. Codori AM, Petersen GM, Miglioretti DL, Larkin EK, Bushey MT, Young C et al (1999) Attitudes toward colon cancer gene testing: factors predicting test uptake. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8(4 Pt 2):345–351

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Keller M, Jost R, Kadmon M, Wullenweber HP, Haunstetter CM, Willeke F et al (2004) Acceptance of and attitude toward genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: a comparison of participants and nonparticipants in genetic counseling. Dis Colon Rectum 47(2):153–162

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Kinney AY, Choi YA, DeVellis B, Kobetz E, Millikan RC, Sandler RS (2000) Interest in genetic testing among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients. Am J Prev Med 18(3):249–252

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Stoffel EM, Ford B, Mercado RC, Punglia D, Kohlmann W, Conrad P et al (2008) Sharing genetic test results in lynch syndrome: communication with close and distant relatives. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 6(3):333–338

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. American Society of Human Genetics Social Issues Subcommitee on Family disclosure (1998) Statement: professional disclosure of familial genetic information. Am J Hum Genet 62(2):474–483

    Google Scholar 

  74. Forrest LE, Delatycki MB, Skene L, Aitken M (2007) Communicating genetic information in families-a review of guidelines and position papers. Eur J Hum Genet 15(6):612–618

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Hughes C, Lynch H, Durham C, Snyder C, Lemon S, Narod S et al (1999) Communication of BRCA1/2 test results in hereditary breast cancer families. Cancer Res Ther Control 8(1–2):51–59

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hughes C, Lerman C, Schwartz M, Peshkin BN, Wenzel L, Narod S et al (2002) All in the family: evaluation of the process and content of sisters’ communication about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic test results. Am J Med Genet 107(2):143–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Vennin P, Chabal F, Aurran Y, Nogues C et al (1996) Attitudes towards cancer predictive testing and transmission of information to the family. J Med Genet 33(9):731–736

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Chabal F, Lasset C, Nogues C, Stoppa-Lyonnet D et al (2000) Disclosure to the family of breast/ovarian cancer genetic test results: patient’s willingness and associated factors. Am J Med Genet 94(1):13–18

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Forrest K, Simpson S, Wilson B, van Teijlingen E, McKee L, Haites N et al (2003) To tell or not to tell: barriers and facilitators in family communication about genetic risk. Clin Genet 64(4):317–326

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Kausmeyer DT, Lengerich EJ, Kluhsman BC, Morrone D, Harper GR, Baker MJ (2006) A survey of patients’ experiences with the cancer genetic counseling process: recommendations for cancer genetics programs. J Genet Couns 15(6):409–431

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Mesters I, Ausems M, Eichhorn S, Vasen H (2005) Informing one’s family about genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC): a retrospective exploratory study. Fam Cancer 4(2):163–167

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Claes E, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Decruyenaere M, Denayer L, Legius E (2003) Communication with close and distant relatives in the context of genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Am J Hum Genet 116(1):11–16

    Google Scholar 

  83. Koehly LM, Peterson SK, Watts BG, Kempf KKG, Vernon SW, Gritz ER (2003) A social network analysis of communication about hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer genetic testing and family functioning. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 12(4):304–313

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Kohut K, Manno M, Gallinger S, Esplen MJ (2007) Should healthcare providers have a duty to warn family members of individuals with an HNPCC-causing mutation? A survey of patients from the ontario familial colon cancer registry. Br Med J 44(6):404–407

    Google Scholar 

  85. Green J, Richards M, Murton F, Statham H, Hallowell N (1997) Family communication and genetic counseling: the case of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns 6(1):45–60

    Google Scholar 

  86. Patenaude AF, Dorval M, DiGianni LS, Schneider KA, Chittenden A, Garber JE (2006) Sharing BRCA1/2 test results with first-degree relatives: factors predicting who women tell. J Clin Oncol 24(4):700–706

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Wilson BJ, Forrest K, van Teijlingen ER, McKee L, Haites N, Matthews E et al (2004) Family communication about genetic risk: the little that is known. Community Genet 7(1):15–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Gaff CL, Collins V, Symes T, Halliday J (2005) Facilitating family communication about predictive genetic testing: probands’ perceptions. J Genet Couns 14(2):133–140

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Lehmann LS, Weeks JC, Klar N, Biener L, Garber JE (2000) Disclosure of familial genetic information: perceptions of the duty to inform. Am J Med 109(9):705–711

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. European Commission (2004) Ethical, legal and social aspects of genetic testing: research, development and clinical applications. European Commission, Luxemburg

    Google Scholar 

  91. Committee for Public Relations and Ethical Issues of the German Society of Human Genetics (2000) Positional paper of the German Society of Human Genetics, 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  92. National Consultative Ethics Committee for Health and Life Sciences (2003) Regarding the obligation to disclose genetic information of concern to the family in the event of medical necessity. National Consultative Ethics Committee for Health and Life Sciences, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  93. Taitz J (1990) The rule of medical confidentiality v. the moral duty to warn an endangered third party. S Afr Med J 78(1):29–33

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Evans DG, Binchy A, Shenton A, Hopwood P, Craufurd D (2009) Coparison of proactive and usual approaches to offering predictive testing for BRCA1/2 mutations in unaffected relatives. Clin Genet 75(2):124–132

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Dugan RB, Wiesner GL, Juengst ET, O’Riordan M, Matthews AL, Robin NH (2003) Duty to warn at-risk relatives for genetic disease: genetic counselors’ clinical experience. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 119C(1):27–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Falk MJ, Dugan RB, O’Riordan MA, Matthews AL, Robin NH (2003) Medical geneticists’ duty to warn at-risk relatives for genetic disease. Am J Med Genet A 120A(3):374–380

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Suthers GK, Armstrong J, McCormack J, Trott D (2006) Letting the family know: balancing ethics and effectiveness when notifying relatives about genetic testing for a familial disorder. J Med Genet 43(8):665–670

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Aktan-Collan K, Haukkala A, Pylvanainen K, Jarvinen HJ, Aaltonen LA, Peltomaki P et al (2007) Direct contact in inviting high-risk members of hereditary colon cancer families to genetic counselling and DNA testing. J Med Genet 44(11):732–738

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Charles S, Kessler L, Stopfer JE, Domchek S, Halbert CH (2006) Satisfaction with genetic counseling for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among african american women. Patient Educ Couns 63(1–2):196–204

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Lea DH (1996) Emerging quality improvement measures in genetic counseling. J Genet Couns 5(3):123–137

    Google Scholar 

  101. Shiloh S, Avdor O, Goodman RM (1990) Satisfaction with genetic counseling: dimensions and measurement. Am J Med Genet 37(4):522–529

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Tercyak KP, Johnson SB, Roberts SF, Cruz AC (2001) Psychological response to prenatal genetic counseling and amniocentesis. Patient Educ Couns 43(1):73–84

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Bleiker EM, Aaronson NK, Menko FH, Hahn DE, van Asperen CJ, Rutgers EJ et al (1997) Genetic counseling for hereditary cancer: a pilot study on experiences of patients and family members. Patient Educ Couns 32(1–2):107–116

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Bjorvatn C, Eide GE, Hanestad BR, Oyen N, Havik OE, Carlsson A et al (2007) Risk perception, worry and satisfaction related to genetic counseling for hereditary cancer. J Genet Couns 16(2):211–222

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Collins V, Halliday J, Warren R, Williamson R (2000) Cancer worries, risk perceptions and associations with interest in DNA testing and clinic satisfaction in a familial colorectal cancer clinic. Clin Genet 58(6):460–468

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Davey A, Rostant K, Harrop K, Goldblatt J, O’Leary P (2005) Evaluating genetic counseling: client expectations, psychological adjustment and satisfaction with service. J Genet Couns 14(3):197–206

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. DeMarco TA, Peshkin BN, Mars BD, Tercyak KP (2004) Patient satisfaction with cancer genetic counseling: a psychometric analysis of the genetic counseling satisfaction scale. J Genet Couns 13(4):293–304

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Sagi M, Kaduri L, Zlotogora J, Peretz T (1998) The effect of genetic counseling on knowledge and perceptions regarding risks for breast cancer. J Genet Couns 7(5):417–434

    Google Scholar 

  109. Stadler MP, Mulvihill JJ (1998) Cancer risk assessment and genetic counselling in an academic medical centre: consultants’ satisfaction, knowledge and behaviour in the first year. J Genet Couns 7:279–297

    Google Scholar 

  110. Nordin K, Liden A, Hansson M, Rosenquist R, Berglund G (2002) Coping style, psychological distress, risk perception, and satisfaction in subjects attending genetic counselling for hereditary cancer. J Med Genet 39(9):689–694

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Hallowell N, Murton F, Statham H, Green J, Richards M (1997) Women’s need for information before attending genetic counselling for familial breast or ovarian cancer: a questionnaire, interview, and observational study. Br Med J 314(7076):281–283

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Bernhardt BA, Biesecker BB, Mastromario CL (2000) Goals, benefits, and outcomes of genetic counselling: client and genetic counselor assessment. Am J Med Genet 94(3):189–197

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Michie S, McDonald V, Marteau TM (1997) Genetic counselling: information given, recall and satisfaction. Patient Educ Couns 32(1–2):101–106

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Pieterse AH, van Dulmen AM, Beemer FA, Bensing JM, Ausems MG (2007) Cancer genetic counseling: communication and counselees’ post-visit satisfaction, cognitions, anxiety, and needs fulfillment. J Genet Couns 16(1):85–96

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Bober SL, Hoke LA, Duda RB, Tung NM (2007) Recommendation recall and satisfaction after attending breast/ovarian cancer risk counseling. J Genet Couns 16(6):755–762

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Parrott S, DelVecchio M (2007) Professional status survey 2006. National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc., Chicago. www.nsgc.org/client_files/careers/2006_PSS_Results.doc. Accessed May 2012

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MRC Human Genetics Research Unit, Division of Human Genetics, Institute of Infectious Diseases and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, South Africa

    Zandrè Bruwer & Raj Ramesar

Authors
  1. Zandrè Bruwer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raj Ramesar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zandrè Bruwer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Laboratory for Molecular Biology, National Institute of Chemistry, Hajdrihova 19, Ljubljana, SI-1001, Slovenia

    Matjaž Vogelsang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bruwer, Z., Ramesar, R. (2013). Lynch Syndrome: Genetic Counselling of At-Risk Individuals and Families. In: Vogelsang, M. (eds) DNA Alterations in Lynch Syndrome. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6597-9_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation