Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: a systematic review

Phyllis N Butow, Elizabeth A Lobb, Alexandra Barratt, Bettina Meiser and Katherine M Tucker
Med J Aust 2003; 178 (2): 77-81.


Objectives: To conduct a systematic review of the effects of genetic counselling and testing for familial breast cancer on women's perception of risk and psychological morbidity.

Data sources: MEDLINE, PsychLIT and EMBASE were searched for the period 1980–2001.

Study selection: Studies were eligible if published in a peer-reviewed journal in English, included women with a family history of breast cancer who underwent genetic counselling or testing and had either a randomised controlled trial or prospective design, with a pre- and at least one post-counselling assessment.

Data synthesis: As there was considerable heterogeneity in populations and measures, results were summarised rather than subjected to meta-analysis.

Results: Overall, genetic counselling and testing appear to produce psychological benefits and to improve accuracy of risk perception. Carriers of mutations in cancer predisposition genes did not experience significant increases in depression and anxiety after disclosure of their mutation status, while non-carriers experienced significant relief. Women who were tested but declined to learn their results seemed to be at greater risk of a worse psychological outcome.

Conclusions: To date, the data on psychological outcomes after genetic counselling and testing are reassuring. However, few studies used a randomised trial design, limiting the strength of the conclusions. Follow-up to date has been short, and we know little about the long-term impact of testing on patient behaviours, perceptions and psychological state.

Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

  • Phyllis N Butow1
  • Elizabeth A Lobb2
  • Alexandra Barratt3
  • Bettina Meiser4
  • Katherine M Tucker5

  • 1 University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW.
  • 2 Department of Psychological Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW.
  • 3 Hereditary Cancer Clinic, Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW.



P N B was supported by a Senior Research Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, E A L by a grant from the University of Sydney Cancer Research Fund, and B M by Public Health Australia Fellowship 007079 from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.

Competing interests:

None identified.

  • 1. National Health and Medical Research Council. Familial aspects of cancer: a guide to clinical practice. Canberra: NHMRC, 1999.
  • 2. Hsia YE. The genetic counselor as information giver. In: Capron AM, Lappé MRF, Powledge TM, et al, editors. Genetic counselling: facts, values and norms. New York: Alan R. Liss, 1979: 169-186.
  • 3. Kash KM, Holland JC, Osborne MP, et al. Psychological counselling strategies for women at risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1995; 17: 73-79.
  • 4. Croyle RT, Achilles JS, Lerman C. Psychologic aspects of cancer genetic testing: a research update for clinicians. Cancer 1997; 80 (3 Suppl): 569-575.
  • 5. Fraser F. Genetic counselling. Am J Hum Gen 1974; 4: 636-659.
  • 6. Brain A, Gray J, Norman P. Randomised trial of a specialist genetic assessment service for familial breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 1345-1351.
  • 7. Cull A, Miller H, Porterfield T, et al. The use of videotaped information in cancer genetic counselling: A randomised evaluation study. Br J Cancer 1998; 77: 830-837.
  • 8. Cull A, Anderson EDC, Campbell S, et al. The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women's risk perceptions and levels of distress. Br J Cancer 1999; 79: 501-508.
  • 9. Evans DGR, Blair V, Greenhalgh R, et al. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1994; 70: 934-938.
  • 10. Meiser B, Butow P, Barratt A, et al. Risk perceptions and knowledge of breast cancer genetics in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Psychol Health 2001; 16: 297-311.
  • 11. Watson M, Lloyd S, Davidson J, et al. The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception and mental health in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1999; 79: 868-874.
  • 12. Lerman C, Schwartz MD, Miller SM, et al. A randomized trial of breast cancer risk counselling: Interacting effects of counselling, educational level, and coping style. Health Psychol 1996; 15: 75-83.
  • 13. Hopwood P, Keeling F, Long A, et al. Psychological support needs for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer: Some preliminary indicators. Psycho-oncol 1998; 7: 407-412.
  • 14. Julian-Reynier C, Eisinger F, Chabal F, et al. Cancer genetic consultation and anxiety in health consultees. Psychol Health 1999; 14: 379-390.
  • 15. Meiser B, Butow P, Barratt A, et al Long-term outcomes of genetic counselling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Patient Educ Counseling 2001; 44: 215-225.
  • 16. Watson M, Duvivier V, Wade Walsh M, et al. Family history of breast cancer: what do women understand and recall about their genetic risk? J Med Genet 1998; 35: 731-738.
  • 17. Meiser B, Halliday JL. What is the impact of genetic counselling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer? A meta-analytic review. Soc Sci Med 2002; 54: 1463-1470.
  • 18. Dudok de Wit AC, Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Tibben A, et al. Effect on a Dutch family of predictive DNA-testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Lancet 1994; 344: 197.
  • 19. Lynch HT, Watson P, Convay TA, et al. DNA screening for breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility based on linked markers. Arch Intern Med 1993; 153: 1979-1987.
  • 20. Croyle RT, Smith KR, Botkin JR, et al. Psychological responses to BRCA1 mutation testing: Preliminary findings. Health Psychol 1997; 16: 63-72.
  • 21. Lerman C, Hughes C, Lemon SJ, et al. What you don't know can hurt you: Adverse psychological effects in members of BRCA1-linked and BRCA2-linked families who decline genetic testing. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 1650-1654.
  • 22. Lodder L, Frets P, Trijsburg R, et al. Psychological impact of receiving a BRCA1/BRCA2 test result. Am J Med Gen 2001; 98: 15-24.
  • 23. Meiser B, Butow P, Friedlander M, et al. Psychological impact of genetic testing for women for breast cancer susceptibility. Eur J Cancer 2003. In press.
  • 24. Smith KR, West JA, Croyle RT, et al. Familial context of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: moderating effect of siblings' test results on psychological distress one to two weeks after BRCA1 mutation testing. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999; 8: 385-392.
  • 25. National Health and Medical Research Council. A guide to the development, implementation and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines. Canberra: NHMRC, 1999.
  • 26. Michie S, Axworthy D, Weinmann J, et al. Genetic counselling: Predicting patient outcomes. Psychol Health 1996; 11: 797-809.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.