Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Personalized Medicine Through SNP Testing for Breast Cancer Risk: Clinical Implementation

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Genetic Counseling

Abstract

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have the potential to improve personalized medicine in breast cancer care. As new SNPs are discovered, further enhancing risk classification, SNP testing may serve to complement family history and phenotypic risk factors when assessed in a clinical setting. SNP analysis is particularly relevant to high-risk women who may seek out such information to guide their decision-making around risk-reduction. However, little is known about how high-risk women may respond to SNP testing with regard to clinical decision-making. We examined high-risk women’s interest in SNP testing for breast cancer risk through an online survey of hypothetical testing scenarios. Women stated their preferences for sharing test results and selected the most likely follow-up action they would pursue in each of the test result scenarios (above average and below average risk for breast cancer). Four hundred seventy-eight women participated. Most women (89 %) did not know what a SNP was prior to the study. Once SNP testing was described, 75 % were interested in SNP testing. Participants stated an interest in lifestyle interventions for risk-reduction and wanted to discuss their testing results with their doctor or a genetic counselor. Women are interested in SNP testing and are prepared to make lifestyle changes based on testing results. Women’s preference for discussing testing results with a healthcare provider aligns with the current trend towards SNP testing in a clinical setting.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Annas, G. J., & Elias, S. (2014). 23andMe and the FDA. The New England Journal of Medicine, 370(11), 985–988.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, A. C., Beesley, J., McGuffog, L., Sinilnikova, O. M., Healey, S., Neuhausen, S. L., & Easton, D. F. (2010). Common breast cancer susceptibility alleles and the risk of breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: implications for risk prediction. Cancer Research, 70(23), 9742–9754.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bellcross, C. A., Page, P. Z., & Meaney-Delman, D. (2012). Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing and cancer risk prediction. Cancer Journal (Sudbury, Mass.), 18(4), 293–302. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22846729.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bloss, C. S., Schork, N. J., & Topol, E. J. (2011). Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. The New England Journal of Medicine, 364(6), 524–534.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, D., Hickman, K. M., & Powers, D. (1997). Importance of psychological variables in understanding risk perceptions and breast cancer screening of African American women. Women’s Health (Hillsdale, N.J.), 3(3–4), 227–242. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9426495.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brentnall, A. R., Evans, D. G., & Cuzick, J. (2014). Distribution of breast cancer risk from SNPs and classical risk factors in women of routine screening age in the UK. British Journal of Cancer, 110(3), 827–828.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Campa, D., Kaaks, R., Le Marchand, L., Haiman, C. A., Travis, R. C., Berg, C. D., & Canzian, F. (2011). Interactions between genetic variants and breast cancer risk factors in the breast and prostate cancer cohort consortium. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 103(16), 1252–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyrus-David, M. S. (2010). Knowledge and accuracy of perceived personal risk in underserved women who are at increased risk of breast cancer. Journal of Cancer Education : The Official Journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 25(4), 617–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M. B., Lerman, C. L., Ross, E., Schwartz, M. D., Sands, C. B., & Masny, A. (1996). Gail model breast cancer risk components are poor predictors of risk perception and screening behavior. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 41(1), 59–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. F., Pooley, K. A., Dunning, A. M., Pharoah, P. D. P., Thompson, D., Ballinger, D. G., & Ponder, B. A. J. (2007). Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nature, 447(7148), 1087–1093.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. G., Naik, G., Ahmed, H., Elwyn, G. J., Pickles, T., Hood, K., & Playle, R. (2013). Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online), 2, CD001865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 672–680. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X07304449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frosch, D. L., May, S. G., Rendle, K. A. S., Tietbohl, C., & Elwyn, G. (2012). Authoritarian physicians and patients’ fear of being labeled “difficult” among key obstacles to shared decision making. Health Affairs (Project Hope), 31(5), 1030–1038. doi:https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, K. D., Peshkin, B. N., Luta, G., Tuong, W., & Schwartz, M. D. (2011). Interest in genetic testing for modest changes in breast cancer risk: implications for SNP testing. Public Health Genomics, 14(3), 178–189.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, S. W., O’Grady, C., Karp, L., Smith, D., Schwartz, J. S., Hornik, R. C., & Armstrong, K. (2009). Risk information exposure and direct-to-consumer genetic testing for BRCA mutations among women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention : A Publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, Cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 18(4), 1303–1311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurmankin, A., Domchek, S., Stopfer, J., Fels, C., & Armstrong, K. (2005). Patients’ resistance to risk information in genetic counseling for BRCA1/2. Archives of Internal Medicine, 14(165), 523–529. Retrieved from https://doi.org/vpn.ucsf.edu/pubmed/,DanaInfo=www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov+?term=gurmankin+2005+patients’+resistance+to+risk.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, T. O., Renz, A. D., Snapinn, K. W., Bowen, D. J., & Edwards, K. L. (2012). Awareness and uptake of direct-to-consumer genetic testing among cancer cases, their relatives, and controls: the Northwest Cancer Genetics Network. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers, 16(7), 744–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanoch, Y., Miron-Shatz, T., Cole, H., Himmelstein, M., & Federman, A. (2010). Choice, numeracy, and physicians-in-training performance: the case of Medicare Part D. Retrieved from https://doi.org/vpn.ucsf.edu/pubmed/,DanaInfo=www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov+?term=Hanoch,+Y.,+Miron-Shatz,+T,+Cole,+H.,+Himmelstein,+M.,+&+Federman,+A.+D.+(2010).+Choice,+numeracy++and+physicians-in-training+performance:+the+case+of+Medicare+Part+D.+Health+Psychology,+29(4),+454-459.

  • Heald, B., Edelman, E., & Eng, C. (2012). Prospective comparison of family medical history with personal genome screening for risk assessment of common cancers. European Journal of Human Genetics : EJHG, 20(5), 547–551.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, K. T., Christensen, K. D., Yashar, B. M., Roberts, J. S., Gollust, S. E., & Uhlmann, W. R. (2011). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: an assessment of genetic counselors’ knowledge and beliefs. Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 13(4), 325–332. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182011636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingham, S. L., Warwick, J., Byers, H., Lalloo, F., Newman, W. G., & Evans, D. G. R. (2012). Is multiple SNP testing in BRCA2 and BRCA1 female carriers ready for use in clinical practice? Results from a large Genetic Centre in the UK. Clinical Genetics. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23050611

  • Ingle, J. N., Liu, M., Wickerham, D. L., Schaid, D. J., Wang, L., Mushiroda, T., & Weinshilboum, R. M. (2013). Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators and Pharmacogenomic Variation in ZNF423 Regulation of BRCA1 Expression: Individualized Breast Cancer Prevention. Cancer Discovery, 3(7), 812–825.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaphingst, K. A., McBride, C. M., Wade, C., Alford, S. H., Reid, R., Larson, E., … Brody, L. C. (2012). Patients’ understanding of and responses to multiplex genetic susceptibility test results. Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22481132

  • Kaufman, D. J., Bollinger, J. M., Dvoskin, R. L., & Scott, J. A. (2012). Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21(3), 413–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mealiffe, M. E., Stokowski, R. P., Rhees, B. K., Prentice, R. L., Pettinger, M., & Hinds, D. A. (2010). Assessment of clinical validity of a breast cancer risk model combining genetic and clinical information. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 102(21), 1618–1627.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Michailidou, K., Hall, P., Gonzalez-Neira, A., Ghoussaini, M., Dennis, J., Milne, R. L., & Easton, D. F. (2013). Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nature Genetics, 45(4), 353–361. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2563.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Offit, K. (2011). Personalized medicine: new genomics, old lessons. Human Genetics, 130(1), 3–14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-011-1028-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, K. P., Cogswell, W. A., Christianson, C. A., Dave, G., Verma, A., Eubanks, S., & Henrich, V. C. (2012). Primary care physicians’ awareness, experience and opinions of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21(1), 113–126. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9390-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riordan, S., Rodriguez, D. F., & Kieran, S. (2012). Personal genomic testing as part of the complete breast cancer risk assessment: a case report. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21(5), 638–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., Black, W. C., & Welch, H. G. (1997). The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127(11), 966–972.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Senay, I., & Kaphingst, K. A. (2009). Anchoring-and-adjustment bias in communication of disease risk. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 29(2), 193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van’t Veer, L. J., & Bernards, R. (2008). Enabling personalized cancer medicine through analysis of gene-expression patterns. Nature, 452(7187), 564–570. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, S. W. (1999). Risk perception and risk communication for cancer screening behaviors: a review. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 101–119. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10854465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitzel, J. N., Blazer, K. R., & Macdonald, D. J. (2011). Genetics, Genomics, and Cancer Risk Assessment State of the Art and Future Directions in the Era of Personalized Medicine. CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 61(5), 327–359. doi:https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20128.Available.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by grant number MRSG112037 from the American Cancer Society. Additional resources for this study were obtained from the Cancer Genetics Network (RFA CA-97-004, RFA CA-97-019, RFP No. N01-PC-55049-40), a University of Plymouth award, and a European Research Council Marie Curie Reintegration Grant [No. PIRG7-GA-2010-268224]. These funding sources ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. We would also like to thank Elaine Allen for her guidance with the statistical analysis for this study.

Human Studies and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

Rebecca Howe, Talya Miron-Shatz, Yaniv Hanoch, Zehra B. Omer, Cristina O’Donoghue, and Elissa M. Ozanne declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Frank H. Netter MD School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, North Haven, CT, USA

    Rebecca Howe

  2. Center for Medical Decision Making, Ono Academic College, Kiryat Ono, Israel

    Talya Miron-Shatz

  3. Department of Psychology, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK

    Yaniv Hanoch

  4. School of Medicine, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, MA, USA

    Zehra B. Omer

  5. Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Cristina O’Donoghue

  6. Department of Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Cristina O’Donoghue & Elissa M. Ozanne

  7. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH, USA

    Elissa M. Ozanne

Authors
  1. Rebecca Howe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Talya Miron-Shatz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yaniv Hanoch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zehra B. Omer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cristina O’Donoghue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Elissa M. Ozanne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elissa M. Ozanne.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Howe, R., Miron-Shatz, T., Hanoch, Y. et al. Personalized Medicine Through SNP Testing for Breast Cancer Risk: Clinical Implementation. J Genet Counsel 24, 744–751 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9803-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9803-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation