Purpose: In this brief report, we ask whether women’s interpretation of breast cancer risk based on their low likelihood of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation is associated with their information-sharing behavior, and whether misinterpretation is associated with motives for sharing the result. Methods: Women in mammography clinics who completed a brief family history assessment and deemed to be at low likelihood of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation were asked to complete a 1-time online survey between June 2016 and January 2017. Results: One-third (44/148) of women shared their family history screen result with someone in their social network. Result information was shared largely with a first-degree female relative to express feelings of relief (77%, 33/43). There were no differences in likelihood of sharing based on breast cancer risk interpretation. However, women who misinterpreted the implications of the result for general breast cancer risk reported more motives to share the result with their social network than those who accurately interpreted their breast cancer risk. Conclusions: As family history-based screening for hereditary breast cancer is broadly implemented, the communication needs of the majority of women who will be unlikely of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation must be considered. The motives of women who misinterpreted the implications of this result for breast cancer risk suggest the possibility that miscommunication could be spread to the broader family network.

1.
US Preventive Services Task Force
.
Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer: US preventive services task force recommendation statement
.
JAMA
.
2019
;
322
(
7
):
652
65
.
2.
PDQ Cancer Genetics Editorial Board
.
Cancer genetics risk assessment and counseling (PDQ®): health professional version
.
Bethesda, MD
:
National Cancer Institute
;
2020
[cited 2020 May 19]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26389258/.
3.
Borzekowski
DL
,
Guan
Y
,
Smith
KC
,
Erby
LH
,
Roter
DL
.
The Angelina effect: immediate reach, grasp, and impact of going public
.
Genet Med
.
2014
;
16
(
7
):
516
21
. .
4.
Bakos
AD
,
Hutson
SP
,
Loud
JT
,
Peters
JA
,
Giusti
RM
,
Greene
MH
.
BRCA mutation-negative women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families: a qualitative study of the BRCA-negative experience
.
Health Expect
.
2008
;
11
(
3
):
220
31
. .
5.
Macrae
L
,
de Souza
AN
,
Loiselle
CG
,
Wong
N
.
Experience of BRCA1/2 mutation-negative young women from families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative study
.
Hered Cancer Clin Pract
.
2013
;
11
(
1
):
14
. .
6.
Gavaruzzi
T
,
Tasso
A
,
Franiuk
M
,
Varesco
L
,
Lotto
L
.
Are young women ready for BRCA testing? Comparing attitudes and comprehension of two age groups of healthy Italian women
.
Patient Educ Couns
.
2019
;
102
(
6
):
1210
6
. .
7.
Guan
Y
,
Condit
CM
,
Escoffery
C
,
Bellcross
CA
,
McBride
CM
.
Do women who receive a negative BRCA1/2 risk result understand the implications for breast cancer risk?
Public Health Genomics
.
2019
;
22
(
3–4
):
102
9
. .
8.
Butterfield
RM
,
Evans
JP
,
Rini
C
,
Kuczynski
KJ
,
Waltz
M
,
Cadigan
RJ
, et al
Returning negative results to individuals in a genomic screening program: lessons learned
.
Genet Med
.
2019
;
21
(
2
):
409
16
. .
9.
Gaff
CL
,
Clarke
AJ
,
Atkinson
P
,
Sivell
S
,
Elwyn
G
,
Iredale
R
, et al
Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review
.
Eur J Hum Genet
.
2007
;
15
(
10
):
999
1011
. .
10.
Schrodt
P
,
Witt
PL
,
Messersmith
AS
.
A meta-analytical review of family communication patterns and their associations with information processing, behavioral, and psychosocial outcomes
.
Commun Monogr
.
2008
;
75
(
3
):
248
69
. .
11.
Chaudoir
SR
,
Fisher
JD
.
The disclosure processes model: understanding disclosure decision making and postdisclosure outcomes among people living with a concealable stigmatized identity
.
Psychol Bull
.
2010
;
136
(
2
):
236
56
. .
12.
McBride
CM
,
Guan
Y
,
Hay
JL
.
Regarding the yin and yang of precision cancer-screening and treatment: are we creating a neglected majority?
Ijerph
.
2019
;
16
(
21
):
4168
. .
13.
Guan
Y
,
Nehl
E
,
Pencea
I
,
Condit
CM
,
Escoffery
C
,
Bellcross
CA
, et al
Willingness to decrease mammogram frequency among women at low risk for hereditary breast cancer
.
Sci Rep
.
2019
;
9
(
1
):
9599
. .
14.
Bellcross
CA
,
Lemke
AA
,
Pape
LS
,
Tess
AL
,
Meisner
LT
.
Evaluation of a breast/ovarian cancer genetics referral screening tool in a mammography population
.
Genet Med
.
2009
;
11
(
11
):
783
9
. .
15.
Bellcross
C
,
Hermstad
A
,
Tallo
C
,
Stanislaw
C
.
Validation of version 3.0 of the breast cancer genetics referral screening tool (B-RST)
.
Genet Med
.
2018
;
21
(
1
):
181
4
.
16.
Vadaparampil
ST
,
Malo
T
,
de la Cruz
C
,
Christie
J
.
Do breast cancer patients tested in the oncology care setting share BRCA mutation results with family members and health care providers?
J Cancer Epidemiol
.
2012
;
2012
:
498062
. .
17.
Himes
DO
,
Clayton
MF
,
Donaldson
GW
,
Ellington
L
,
Buys
SS
,
Kinney
AY
.
Breast cancer risk perceptions among relatives of women with uninformative negative BRCA1/2 test results: the moderating effect of the amount of shared information
.
J Genet Couns
.
2016
;
25
(
2
):
258
69
. .
18.
Siu
AL
.
Screening for breast cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement
.
Ann Intern Med
.
2016
;
164
(
4
):
279
96
. .
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.