Background: Cancer risk assessment should stratify screening and enable preventive health interventions based on individuals’ risk of developing cancer. Studies are underway to develop epigenetic tests, including trials investigating women’s risk of female-specific cancers. Objective: Given potential consequences for quality of life and care, women considering such assessment need to be able to make a fully informed choice. It is currently unknown what information they require. Method: We conducted 4 focus groups with 25 women (aged 30–65 years) to explore what they want to know about epigenetic cancer risk assessment, how they evaluate its usefulness, and how they would like to be informed about their risk. Independent coders categorised paraphrases based on transcribed recordings of the group discussions to enable a summarising text analysis. Results: The women in the study wanted to understand how the epigenetic approach is different from established genomic tests, how epigenetic changes relate to cancer, and whether the test enables monitoring of one’s cancer risk (n = 11). Furthermore, they desired information about their basic cancer risks (n = 11), about the quality of the assessment (n = 9), and about measures to deal with a risk result (n = 11). Conclusions: Informed consent in epigenetic cancer risk assessments depends on whether basic cancer risks, uncertainties of testing, and effects of tests on care management are transparently communicated prior to testing. These requirements are not limited to epigenetic testing. Accordingly, physicians and health authorities will have to provide multi-layered information when counselling women on cancer risk assessment.

1.
Prasad
V
,
Lenzer
J
,
Newman
DH
: Why cancer screening has never been shown to" save lives"-and what we can do about it. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online)
2016
;352
2.
Khera
AV
,
Chaffin
M
,
Aragam
KG
,
Haas
ME
,
Roselli
C
,
Choi
SH
, et al
Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations
.
Nat Genet
.
2018
Sep
;
50
(
9
):
1219
24
.
[PubMed]
1061-4036
3.
Pashayan
N
,
Reisel
D
,
Widschwendter
M
.
Integration of genetic and epigenetic markers for risk stratification: opportunities and challenges
.
Per Med
.
2016
Mar
;
13
(
2
):
93
5
.
[PubMed]
1741-0541
4.
Teschendorff
AE
,
Gao
Y
,
Jones
A
,
Ruebner
M
,
Beckmann
MW
,
Wachter
DL
, et al
DNA methylation outliers in normal breast tissue identify field defects that are enriched in cancer
.
Nat Commun
.
2016
Jan
;
7
(
1
):
10478
.
[PubMed]
2041-1723
5.
Teschendorff
AE
,
Yang
Z
,
Wong
A
,
Pipinikas
CP
,
Jiao
Y
,
Jones
A
, et al
Correlation of Smoking-Associated DNA Methylation Changes in Buccal Cells With DNA Methylation Changes in Epithelial Cancer
.
JAMA Oncol
.
2015
Jul
;
1
(
4
):
476
85
.
[PubMed]
2374-2437
6.
Khoury
MJ
,
Galea
S
.
Will Precision Medicine Improve Population Health?
JAMA
.
2016
Oct
;
316
(
13
):
1357
8
.
[PubMed]
0098-7484
7.
Hollands
GJ
,
French
DP
,
Griffin
SJ
,
Prevost
AT
,
Sutton
S
,
King
S
, et al
The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis
.
BMJ
.
2016
Mar
;
352
:
i1102
.
[PubMed]
0959-8138
8.
French
DP
,
Cameron
E
,
Benton
JS
,
Deaton
C
,
Harvie
M
.
Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews
.
Ann Behav Med
.
2017
Oct
;
51
(
5
):
718
29
.
[PubMed]
0883-6612
9.
GPGI A
.
Gute Praxis Gesundheitsinformation
.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes
.
2016
;
110
:
85
92
.1865-9217
10.
Shofer
S
,
Beyea
M
,
Li
S
,
Bastian
LA
,
Wahidi
MM
,
Kelley
M
, et al
Feasibility of using an epigenetic marker of risk for lung cancer, methylation of p16, to promote smoking cessation among US veterans
.
BMJ Open Respir Res
.
2014
Jun
;
1
(
1
):
e000032
.
[PubMed]
2052-4439
11.
Marteau
TM
,
Weinman
J
.
Self-regulation and the behavioural response to DNA risk information: a theoretical analysis and framework for future research
.
Soc Sci Med
.
2006
Mar
;
62
(
6
):
1360
8
.
[PubMed]
0277-9536
12.
Dent
T
,
Jbilou
J
,
Rafi
I
,
Segnan
N
,
Törnberg
S
,
Chowdhury
S
, et al
Stratified cancer screening: the practicalities of implementation
.
Public Health Genomics
.
2013
;
16
(
3
):
94
9
.
[PubMed]
1662-4246
13.
Hall
AE
,
Chowdhury
S
,
Hallowell
N
,
Pashayan
N
,
Dent
T
,
Pharoah
P
, et al
Implementing risk-stratified screening for common cancers: a review of potential ethical, legal and social issues
.
J Public Health (Oxf)
.
2014
Jun
;
36
(
2
):
285
91
.
[PubMed]
1741-3842
14.
Shieh
Y
,
Eklund
M
,
Sawaya
GF
,
Black
WC
,
Kramer
BS
,
Esserman
LJ
.
Population-based screening for cancer: hope and hype
.
Nat Rev Clin Oncol
.
2016
Sep
;
13
(
9
):
550
65
.
[PubMed]
1759-4774
15.
Trivers
KF
,
Baldwin
LM
,
Miller
JW
,
Matthews
B
,
Andrilla
CH
,
Lishner
DM
, et al
Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study
.
Cancer
.
2011
Dec
;
117
(
23
):
5334
43
.
[PubMed]
0008-543X
16.
Forbes
LJ
,
Ramirez
AJ
;
Expert group on Information about Breast Screening
.
Offering informed choice about breast screening
.
J Med Screen
.
2014
Dec
;
21
(
4
):
194
200
.
[PubMed]
0969-1413
17.
Calsbeek
H
,
Morren
M
,
Bensing
J
,
Rijken
M
.
Knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing: a two year follow-up study in patients with asthma, diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease
.
J Genet Couns
.
2007
Aug
;
16
(
4
):
493
504
.
[PubMed]
1059-7700
18.
Wegwarth
O
,
Schwartz
LM
,
Woloshin
S
,
Gaissmaier
W
,
Gigerenzer
G
.
Do physicians understand cancer screening statistics? A national survey of primary care physicians in the United States
.
Ann Intern Med
.
2012
Mar
;
156
(
5
):
340
9
.
[PubMed]
0003-4819
19.
Wegwarth
O
,
Gaissmaier
W
,
Gigerenzer
G
.
Deceiving numbers: survival rates and their impact on doctors’ risk communication
.
Med Decis Making
.
2011
May-Jun
;
31
(
3
):
386
94
.
[PubMed]
0272-989X
20.
Wegwarth
O
,
Gigerenzer
G
.
US gynecologists’ estimates and beliefs regarding ovarian cancer screening’s effectiveness 5 years after release of the PLCO evidence
.
Sci Rep
.
2018
Nov
;
8
(
1
):
17181
.
[PubMed]
2045-2322
21.
Wegwarth
O
,
Gigerenzer
G
.
“There is nothing to worry about”: gynecologists’ counseling on mammography
.
Patient Educ Couns
.
2011
Aug
;
84
(
2
):
251
6
.
[PubMed]
0738-3991
22.
Studdert
DM
,
Mello
MM
,
Sage
WM
,
DesRoches
CM
,
Peugh
J
,
Zapert
K
, et al
Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment
.
JAMA
.
2005
Jun
;
293
(
21
):
2609
17
.
[PubMed]
0098-7484
23.
Lieb
K
,
Brandtönies
S
.
A survey of german physicians in private practice about contacts with pharmaceutical sales representatives
.
Dtsch Arztebl Int
.
2010
Jun
;
107
(
22
):
392
8
.
[PubMed]
1866-0452
24.
Prinz
R
,
Feufel
MA
,
Gigerenzer
G
,
Wegwarth
O
.
A Feufel M, Gigerenzer G, Wegwarth O: what counselors tell low-risk clients about HIV test performance
.
Curr HIV Res
.
2015
;
13
(
5
):
369
80
.
[PubMed]
1570-162X
25.
Pieterse
AH
,
Ausems
MG
,
Van Dulmen
AM
,
Beemer
FA
,
Bensing
JM
.
Initial cancer genetic counseling consultation: change in counselees’ cognitions and anxiety, and association with addressing their needs and preferences
.
Am J Med Genet A
.
2005
Aug
;
137
(
1
):
27
35
.
[PubMed]
1552-4825
26.
Mesters
I
,
Ausems
A
,
De Vries
H
.
General public’s knowledge, interest and information needs related to genetic cancer: an exploratory study
.
Eur J Cancer Prev
.
2005
Feb
;
14
(
1
):
69
75
.
[PubMed]
0959-8278
27.
Lautenbach
DM
,
Christensen
KD
,
Sparks
JA
,
Green
RC
.
Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine
.
Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet
.
2013
;
14
(
1
):
491
513
.
[PubMed]
1527-8204
28.
Powell
RA
,
Single
HM
.
Focus groups
.
Int J Qual Health Care
.
1996
Oct
;
8
(
5
):
499
504
.
[PubMed]
1353-4505
29.
Lipstein
EA
,
Nabi
E
,
Perrin
JM
,
Luff
D
,
Browning
MF
,
Kuhlthau
KA
.
Parents’ decision-making in newborn screening: opinions, choices, and information needs
.
Pediatrics
.
2010
Oct
;
126
(
4
):
696
704
.
[PubMed]
0031-4005
30.
Pivetti
M
,
Montali
L
,
Simonetti
G
.
The discourse around usefulness, morality, risk and trust: a focus group study on prenatal genetic testing
.
Prenat Diagn
.
2012
Dec
;
32
(
12
):
1205
11
.
[PubMed]
0197-3851
31.
Vuckovic
N
,
Harris
EL
,
Valanis
B
,
Stewart
B
.
Consumer knowledge and opinions of genetic testing for breast cancer risk
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
2003
Oct
;
189
(
4
Suppl
):
S48
53
.
[PubMed]
0002-9378
32.
Mellon
S
,
Gauthier
J
,
Cichon
M
,
Hammad
A
,
Simon
MS
.
Knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of Arab-American women regarding inherited cancer risk
.
J Genet Couns
.
2013
Apr
;
22
(
2
):
268
76
.
[PubMed]
1059-7700
33.
Rahman
B
,
Meisel
SF
,
Fraser
L
,
Side
L
,
Gessler
S
,
Wardle
J
, et al
Population-based genetic risk prediction and stratification for ovarian cancer: views from women at high risk
.
Fam Cancer
.
2015
Mar
;
14
(
1
):
135
44
.
[PubMed]
1389-9600
34.
Sheppard
VB
,
Graves
KD
,
Christopher
J
,
Hurtado-de-Mendoza
A
,
Talley
C
,
Williams
KP
.
African American women’s limited knowledge and experiences with genetic counseling for hereditary breast cancer
.
J Genet Couns
.
2014
Jun
;
23
(
3
):
311
22
.
[PubMed]
1059-7700
35.
Flick
U
.
Qualitative Sozialforschung–Eine Einführung, vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Neuausgabe
.
Reinbek bei Hamburg
:
Rowohlt
;
2007
.
36.
Mayring
P
,
Fenzl
T
. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. In:
Baur
N
,
Blasius
J
, editors
.
Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung
.
Wiesbaden
:
Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
;
2014
. pp.
543
56
.
37.
Emanuel
AS
,
Kiviniemi
MT
,
Howell
JL
,
Hay
JL
,
Waters
EA
,
Orom
H
, et al
Avoiding cancer risk information
.
Soc Sci Med
.
2015
Dec
;
147
:
113
20
.
[PubMed]
0277-9536
38.
Melnyk
D
,
Shepperd
JA
.
Avoiding risk information about breast cancer
.
Ann Behav Med
.
2012
Oct
;
44
(
2
):
216
24
.
[PubMed]
0883-6612
39.
Bernhardt
BA
,
Geller
G
,
Strauss
M
,
Helzlsouer
KJ
,
Stefanek
M
,
Wilcox
PM
, et al
Toward a model informed consent process for BRCA1 testing: a qualitative assessment of women’s attitudes
.
J Genet Couns
.
1997
Jun
;
6
(
2
):
207
22
.
[PubMed]
1059-7700
40.
Silk
KJ
,
Bigbsy
E
,
Volkman
J
,
Kingsley
C
,
Atkin
C
,
Ferrara
M
, et al
Formative research on adolescent and adult perceptions of risk factors for breast cancer
.
Soc Sci Med
.
2006
Dec
;
63
(
12
):
3124
36
.
[PubMed]
0277-9536
41.
IPDAS-Collaboration
.
IPDAS-Checklist for Judging the Quality of Patient Decision Aids.
http://ipdas.ohri.ca/IPDAS_checklist.pdf, 2005,
2017
42.
Croyle
RT
,
Smith
KR
,
Botkin
JR
,
Baty
B
,
Nash
J
.
Psychological responses to BRCA1 mutation testing: preliminary findings
.
Health Psychol
.
1997
Jan
;
16
(
1
):
63
72
.
[PubMed]
0278-6133
43.
Bottorff
JL
,
Ratner
PA
,
Johnson
JL
,
Lovato
CY
,
Joab
SA
.
Communicating cancer risk information: the challenges of uncertainty
.
Patient Educ Couns
.
1998
Jan
;
33
(
1
):
67
81
.
[PubMed]
0738-3991
44.
Hunter
DJ
.
Uncertainty in the Era of Precision Medicine
.
N Engl J Med
.
2016
Aug
;
375
(
8
):
711
3
.
[PubMed]
0028-4793
45.
Gigerenzer
G
.
Risk savvy: How to make good decisions
.
Penguin
;
2015
.
46.
Hersch
J
,
Barratt
A
,
Jansen
J
,
Irwig
L
,
McGeechan
K
,
Jacklyn
G
, et al
Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial
.
Lancet
.
2015
Apr
;
385
(
9978
):
1642
52
.
[PubMed]
0140-6736
47.
Gigerenzer
G
.
What are natural frequencies?
BMJ
.
2011
Oct
;
343
oct17 2
:
d6386
.
[PubMed]
0959-8138
48.
O’Doherty
K
,
Suthers
GK
.
Risky communication: pitfalls in counseling about risk, and how to avoid them
.
J Genet Couns
.
2007
Aug
;
16
(
4
):
409
17
.
[PubMed]
1059-7700
49.
Fagerlin
A
,
Zikmund-Fisher
BJ
,
Ubel
PA
.
“If I’m better than average, then I’m ok?”: comparative information influences beliefs about risk and benefits
.
Patient Educ Couns
.
2007
Dec
;
69
(
1-3
):
140
4
.
[PubMed]
0738-3991
50.
Willis
AM
,
Smith
SK
,
Meiser
B
,
Ballinger
ML
,
Thomas
DM
,
Young
MA
.
Sociodemographic, psychosocial and clinical factors associated with uptake of genetic counselling for hereditary cancer: a systematic review
.
Clin Genet
.
2017
Aug
;
92
(
2
):
121
33
.
[PubMed]
0009-9163
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.