Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

Psychological Determinants of Men's Adherence to Cascade Screening for BRCA1/2 .

Tytuł:
Psychological Determinants of Men's Adherence to Cascade Screening for BRCA1/2 .
Autorzy:
Ongaro G; Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Petrocchi S; Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Calvello M; Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Bonanni B; Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Feroce I; Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Pravettoni G; Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy.; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, 20141 Milan, Italy.
Źródło:
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) [Curr Oncol] 2022 Apr 02; Vol. 29 (4), pp. 2490-2503. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Apr 02.
Typ publikacji:
Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Język:
English
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: 2021- : Basel, Switzerland : MDPI
Original Publication: Toronto : Multimed, c1994-
MeSH Terms:
Breast Neoplasms*/diagnosis
Genetic Testing*
BRCA1 Protein/genetics ; Female ; Germ-Line Mutation ; Heterozygote ; Humans ; Male ; Mass Screening
References:
PLoS One. 2010 Oct 19;5(10):e13473. (PMID: 20976053)
JAMA. 2017 Jun 20;317(23):2402-2416. (PMID: 28632866)
Fam Cancer. 2011 Jun;10(2):213-23. (PMID: 21365268)
Public Health Genomics. 2016;19(5):307-13. (PMID: 27603671)
J Med Genet. 1998 Sep;35(9):739-44. (PMID: 9733032)
Eur J Hum Genet. 2001 Jul;9(7):492-500. (PMID: 11464240)
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Dec;242:112592. (PMID: 31629161)
Am J Mens Health. 2017 Sep;11(5):1444-1459. (PMID: 26468160)
J Cancer Educ. 2018 Aug;33(4):893-900. (PMID: 28105554)
J Genet Couns. 2005 Jun;14(3):207-17. (PMID: 15959652)
Genet Test. 2008 Mar;12(1):81-91. (PMID: 18373407)
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004 Mar;30(3):384-96. (PMID: 15030627)
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Dec 5;99(23):1811-4. (PMID: 18042939)
Sociol Health Illn. 2006 Nov;28(7):969-88. (PMID: 17163862)
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014 Jan 1;41(1):99-101. (PMID: 24368245)
Breast Cancer Res. 2000;2(6):387-91. (PMID: 11250730)
J Genet Couns. 2009 Feb;18(1):42-8. (PMID: 18688698)
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Jan 1;111(1):95-98. (PMID: 30239769)
Psychooncology. 2009 Feb;18(2):200-8. (PMID: 18702049)
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 18;17(3):e0265387. (PMID: 35303741)
Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2022 Mar;10(3):e1851. (PMID: 35166046)
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006 May;58(2):114-23. (PMID: 16600617)
Fam Cancer. 2009;8(3):221-9. (PMID: 19165626)
Genet Test. 2008 Dec;12(4):523-32. (PMID: 19072564)
Eur J Cancer Prev. 2018 May;27(3):279-286. (PMID: 28277317)
Fam Cancer. 2011 Sep;10(3):597-603. (PMID: 21603983)
Psychol Health. 2011 Feb;26(2):151-66. (PMID: 21318927)
Rehabil Psychol. 2014 Feb;59(1):42-9. (PMID: 24446673)
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020 May;181(1):221-224. (PMID: 32232699)
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jan 21;23(1):e20457. (PMID: 33475519)
Psychol Health. 2009 Jun;24(5):545-61. (PMID: 20205011)
J Genet Couns. 2017 Dec;26(6):1179-1196. (PMID: 28667568)
PLoS One. 2022 Apr 8;17(4):e0266327. (PMID: 35395021)
Eur J Hum Genet. 2022 Jan;30(1):62-72. (PMID: 33840815)
Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2016 Mar;8(1):127-51. (PMID: 26970113)
Psychooncology. 2019 Dec;28(12):2422-2424. (PMID: 31512349)
Psychooncology. 2013 Feb;22(2):417-25. (PMID: 22135240)
Eur Urol. 2020 Jan;77(1):24-35. (PMID: 31495749)
J Health Commun. 2006;11 Suppl 1:157-72. (PMID: 16641081)
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021 Jan 06;19(1):77-102. (PMID: 33406487)
J Health Commun. 2017 Dec;22(12):990-998. (PMID: 29199898)
Ann Oncol. 2003 Apr;14(4):549-53. (PMID: 12649099)
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91. (PMID: 17695343)
J Behav Med. 2009 Apr;32(2):197-208. (PMID: 18807164)
Health Psychol. 2019 Jul;38(7):623-637. (PMID: 30973747)
J Genet Couns. 2007 Apr;16(2):211-22. (PMID: 17279329)
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Apr 14;168(7):728-34. (PMID: 18413555)
Nature. 2019 Sep;573(7774):346. (PMID: 31530924)
Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Dec;67(6):1494-504. (PMID: 11063672)
Memory. 2003 Jul-Sep;11(4-5):455-72. (PMID: 14562874)
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 12;10(11):e037748. (PMID: 33184078)
Eur J Hum Genet. 2013 Aug;21(8):793-9. (PMID: 23249955)
Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2009 Aug 23;7(1):15. (PMID: 19698175)
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: BRCA1/2 mutations; cascade screening; decision-making; genetic testing adherence; male prevention
Substance Nomenclature:
0 (BRCA1 Protein)
0 (BRCA1 protein, human)
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20220421 Date Completed: 20220425 Latest Revision: 20220716
Update Code:
20240104
PubMed Central ID:
PMC9030516
DOI:
10.3390/curroncol29040203
PMID:
35448177
Czasopismo naukowe
BRCA1/2 germline mutations predispose carriers to an increased risk of breast, ovarian, prostate, pancreatic, and skin cancer. Men and women are equally likely to pass on or inherit the pathogenic variant. However, there is evidence that male relatives are less involved in cascade screening than female ones. At the same time, little attention has been given to the research on psychological determinants of men's adherence to cascade screening in BRCA1/2 -positive families. Applying some principles of the Health Action Process Approach model, the present research tested a model of relationships on the adherence to BRCA1/2 cascade testing guidelines. The sample comprised 115 men's first-degree relatives of women with verified germline mutations (Mage = 41.93; SD = 17.27). A pre-post test design was applied. Significant associations emerged between the intention to uptake BRCA1/2 genetic testing and age, parental status, breast cancer risk perception, self-referred outcome expectancies, perceived benefit, coping self-efficacy, and planning. Higher perceived benefit predicted increases in intention, and higher intention and coping self-efficacy predicted increases in planning. Intention was a positive total mediator of the relationship between benefit and planning. On a theoretical level, our findings partially supported the Health Action Process Approach as a valuable model based on which interventions could be developed in the context of cascade screening for BRCA1/2 genetic testing. Those results supported the importance of integrated genetic counselling sessions with a strict collaboration between geneticists and psychologists together with interventions planned to increase men's self-monitoring ability to support their self-efficacy.
Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies