Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:23:18.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

28 - Genetic Testing and Ethical Considerations

Cases Involving Adolescents and Young Adults and Cancer

from Section IV - Emerging Ethical Issues in Professional Practice and Next Steps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2018

By
Marilyn Stern ,
Jennifer Bleck  and
Gwendolyn P. Quinn
Edited by
Mark M. Leach  and
Elizabeth Reynolds Welfel
Mark M. Leach
Affiliation:
University of Louisville, Kentucky
Elizabeth Reynolds Welfel
Affiliation:
Cleveland State University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Applied Psychological Ethics , pp. 577 - 597
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Academy of Pediatrics (2001). Ethical issues with genetic testing in pediatrics. Pediatrics, 107, 1451–1455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American College of Medical Genetics (1999). Genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer: assessment, counseling, and testing guidelines. Bethesda, MD: American College of Medical Genetics.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Addressing psychological impacts of genetic testing on patients, families: Six questions for psychologist Andrea Farkas Patenaude, PhD. Retrieved from www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/05/genetic-testing.aspxGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Anderson, L. M. & May, D. S. (1995). Has the use of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening increased in the United States? American Journal of Public Health, 85, 840–842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aubard, Y., Piver, P., Pech, J. C., Galinat, S., & Teissier, M. P. (2001). Ovarian tissue cryopreservation and gynecologic oncology: A review. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 97, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauchamp, T. L. & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benedict, C., Shuk, E., & Ford, J. S. (2015). Fertility issues in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology, 5, 48–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleiker, E., Menko, F. H., Kluijt, I., Taal, B. G., Gerritsma, M. A., Wever, L., & Aaronson, N. K. (2007). Colorectal cancer in the family: Psychosocial distress and social issues in the years following genetic counselling. Hereditary Cancer Clinical Practice, 5, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleyer, A. (2005). The adolescent and young adult gap in cancer care and outcome. Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care, 35, 182–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleyer, A., Barr, R., Hayes-Lattin, B., Thomas, D., Ellis, C., & Anderson, B. (2008). The distinctive biology of cancer in adolescents and young adults. Nature Reviews Cancer, 8, 288–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bleyer, A., O’Leary, M., Barr, R., & Ries, L. A. G. (Eds.) (2006). Cancer epidemiology in older adolescents and young adults 15 to 29 years of age, including SEER incidence and survival: 1975–2000. National Cancer Institute, NIH Pub. No. 06-5767. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute.Google Scholar
Bosch, N., Junyent, N., Gadea, N., et al. (2012). What factors may influence psychological well being at three months and one year post BRCA genetic result disclosure? The Breast, 21, 755–760.Google Scholar
Burgess, M. M. (2001). Beyond consent: Ethical and social issues in genetic testing. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2, 147–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, W. & Press, N. (2006). Genetics as a tool to improve cancer outcomes: Ethics and policy. Nature Reviews Cancer, 6, 476–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campo-Engelstein, L. (2010). Consistency in insurance coverage for iatrogenic conditions resulting from cancer treatment including fertility preservation. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 1284–1286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caplan, A. L. (2015). Chloe’s Law: A powerful legislative movement challenging a core ethical norm of genetic testing. PLOS Biology, 13, 1–4.Google Scholar
Christy, S. M., Mosher, C. E., & Rawl, S. M. (2014). Integrating men’s health and masculinity theories to explain colorectal cancer screening behavior. American Journal of Men’s Health, 8, 54–65.Google Scholar
Collins, F. S. (2010). Opportunities for research and NIH. Science, 327, 36–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dudzinski, D. M. (2004). Ethical issues in fertility preservation for adolescent cancer survivors: Oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 17, 97–102.Google Scholar
Fisher, B., Costantino, J. P., Wickerham, D. L., et al. (2005). Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 97, 1652–1662.Google Scholar
Fulda, K. G. & Lykens, K. (2006). Ethical issues in predictive genetic testing: A public health perspective. Journal of Medical Ethics, 32, 143–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gahm, J., Wickman, M., & Brandberg, Y. (2010). Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with inherited risk of breast cancer – Prevalence of pain and discomfort, impact on sexuality, quality of life and feelings of regret two years after surgery. The Breast, 19, 462–469.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genetic Alliance (2010). Understanding genetics: A District of Columbia guide for patients and health professionals. Washington, DC: District of Columbia Department of Health.Google Scholar
Goldman, R. E., Diaz, J. A., & Kim, I. (2009). Perspectives of colorectal cancer risk and screening among Dominicans and Puerto Ricans: Stigma and misperceptions. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 1559–1568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, D., Galvin, H., & Horne, B. (2003). The psycho‐social impact of infertility on young male cancer survivors: A qualitative investigation. Psycho‐Oncology, 12, 141–152.Google Scholar
Grundy, R., Larcher, V., Gosden, R., et al. (2001). Fertility preservation for children treated for cancer (2): Ethics of consent for gamete storage and experimentation. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 84, 360–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guttmacher, A. E., Collins, F. S., & Clayton, E. W. (2003). Ethical, legal, and social implications of genomic medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 349, 562–569.Google Scholar
Hadley, D. W., Jenkins, J. F., Dimond, E., de Carvalho, M., Kirsch, I., & Palmer, C. G. (2004). Colon cancer screening practices after genetic counseling and testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 39–44.Google Scholar
Heemskerk-Gerritsen, B., Menke-Pluijmers, M., Jager, A., et al. (2013). Substantial breast cancer risk reduction and potential survival benefit after bilateral mastectomy when compared with surveillance in healthy BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective analysis. Annals of Oncology, 24, 2029–2035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishibashi, A. (2001). The needs of children and adolescents with cancer for information and social support. Cancer Nursing, 24, 61–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jadoul, P., Dolmans, M. M., & Donnez, J. (2010). Fertility preservation in girls during childhood: is it feasible, efficient and safe and to whom should it be proposed? Human Reproduction Update, 16, 617–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaphingst, K. A., Stafford, J. D., McGowan, L. D. A., Seo, J., Lachance, C. R., & Goodman, M. S. (2015). Effects of racial and ethnic group and health literacy on responses to genomic risk information in a medically underserved population. Health Psychology, 34, 101–110.Google Scholar
Koehly, L. M., Peterson, S. K., Watts, B. G., Kempf, K. K., Vernon, S. W., & Gritz, E. R. (2003). A social network analysis of communication about hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer genetic testing and family functioning. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 12, 304–313.Google ScholarPubMed
Kohrman, A., Clayton, E. W., Frader, J. E., Grodin, M. A., Moseley, K. L., Porter, I. H., & Wagner, V. M. (1995). Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics, 95, 314–317.Google Scholar
Lea, D. H., Williams, J., & Donahue, M. P. (2005). Ethical issues in genetic testing. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 50, 234–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S. J., Schover, L. R., Partridge, A. H., et al. (2006). American Society of Clinical Oncology recommendations on fertility preservation in cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 2917–2931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, J. & Stern, C. J. (2010). Fertility preservation in adolescents and young adults with cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 4831–4841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liang, J., Kalady, M. F., & Church, J. (2015). Young age of onset colorectal cancers. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 30, 1653–1657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindor, N. M., Petersen, G. M., Hadley, D. W., et al. (2006). Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: A systematic review. JAMA, 296, 1507–1517.Google Scholar
Litton, P. (2008). Non-beneficial pediatric research and the best interests standard: A legal and ethical reconciliation. Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, 8, 361–420.Google Scholar
Loren, A. W., Mangu, P. B., Beck, L. N., et al. (2013). Fertility preservation for patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 31, 2500–2510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manolio, T. A., Collins, F. S., Cox, N. J., et al. (2009). Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases. Nature, 461, 747–753.Google Scholar
McCann, S., MacAuley, D., Barnett, Y., Bunting, B., Bradley, A., Jeffers, L., & Morrison, P. J. (2009). Family communication, genetic testing and colonoscopy screening in hereditary non‐polyposis colon cancer: A qualitative study. Psycho‐Oncology, 18, 1208–1215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Metcalfe, K. A., Esplen, M. J., Goel, V., & Narod, S. A. (2004). Psychosocial functioning in women who have undergone bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Psycho‐Oncology, 13, 14–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moyer, V. A. (2014). Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 160, 271–281.Google ScholarPubMed
Murphy, D., Klosky, J. L., Termuhlen, A., Sawczyn, K. K., & Quinn, G. P. (2013). The need for reproductive and sexual health discussions with adolescent and young adult cancer patients. Contraception, 88, 215–220.Google Scholar
Nance, M., Myers, R., Wexler, A., et al. (2003). Genetic testing for Huntington’s disease: It’s relevance and implications (revised). Washington, DC: United States Huntington’s Disease Genetics Testing Group.Google Scholar
Nelson, H. D., Fu, R., Griffin, J. C., Nygren, P., Smith, M. B., & Humphrey, L. (2009). Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 703–715.Google Scholar
Nelson, H. D., Pappas, M., Zakher, B., Mitchell, J. P., Okinaka-Hu, L., & Fu, R. (2014). Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: A systematic review to update the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 160, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nieman, C. L., Kinahan, K. E., Yount, S. E., et al. (2007). Fertility preservation and adolescent cancer patients: Lessons from adult survivors of childhood cancer and their parents. Cancer Treatment and Research, 138, 201–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyrhinen, T., Hietala, M., Puukka, P., & Leino-Kilpi, H. (2007). Consequences as ethical issues in diagnostic genetic testing – A comparison of the perceptions of patients/parents and personnel. New Genetics and Society, 26, 47–63.Google Scholar
Oktay, K. (2001). Ovarian tissue cryopreservation and transplantation: Preliminary findings and implications for cancer patients. Human Reproduction Update, 7, 526–534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, J. D. & Payne, T. (2013). Implications of BRCA testing in a 27-year-old breast-feeding mother with a strong family history of malignancy. Journal of Medical Cases, 4, 372–375.Google Scholar
Pollack, L. A., Blackman, D. K., Wilson, K. M., Seeff, L. C., & Nadel, M. R. (2006). Colorectal cancer test use among Latino and non-Latino U.S. population. Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice, and Policy, 3, 1–12.Google Scholar
Quinn, G. P., Pal, T., Murphy, D., Vadaparampil, S. T., & Kumar, A. (2012). High-risk consumers’ perceptions of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for hereditary cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 191–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinn, G. P., Peshkin, B. N., Sehovic, I., Bowman, M., Tamargo, C., & Vadaparampil, S. T. (2015). Oncofertility in adolescent and young adult hereditary cancer: Considerations for genetics professionals. World Journal of Medical Genetics, 5, 52–59.Google Scholar
Quinn, G. P., Vadaparampil, S. T., Jacobsen, P. B., Knapp, C., Keefe, D. L., & Bell, G. E. (2010). Frozen hope: Fertility preservation for women with cancer. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 55, 175–180.Google Scholar
Richmond-Rakerd, L. S. (2013). Modern advances in genetic testing: Ethical challenges and training implications for current and future psychologists. Ethics & Behavior, 23, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riley, B. D., Culver, J. O., Skrzynia, C., et al. (2012). Essential elements of genetic cancer risk assessment, counseling, and testing: Updated recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 21, 151–161.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, S. M., Sepucha, K., Ruddy, K. J., et al. (2015). Local therapy decision-making and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in young women with early-stage breast cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 22, 3809–3815.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, L. F., Saal, H. M., David, K. L., & Anderson, R. R. (2013). Technical report: Ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 234–245.Google Scholar
Sarata, A. K. (2015). Genetic testing: Background and policy issues. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
Schover, L. R. (1999). Psychosocial aspects of infertility and decisions about reproduction in young cancer survivors: A review. Medical and Pediatric Oncology, 33, 53–59.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schover, L. R., Rybicki, L. A., Martin, B. A., & Bringelsen, K. A. (1999). Having children after cancer. Cancer, 86, 697–709.3.0.CO;2-J>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seshadri, T., Gook, D., Lade, S., et al. (2006). Lack of evidence of disease contamination in ovarian tissue harvested for cryopreservation from patients with Hodgkin lymphoma and analysis of factors predictive of oocyte yield. British Journal of Cancer, 94, 1007–1010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, J., Bowles, J., Koopman, P., Wood, E., & Trounson, A. (1996). Ovary and ovulation: Fresh and cryopreserved ovarian tissue samples from donors with lymphoma transmit the cancer to graft recipients. Human Reproduction, 11, 1668–1673.Google Scholar
Shin, D., Lo, K. C., & Lipshultz, L. I. (2005). Treatment options for the infertile male with cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute monographs, 34, 48–50.Google Scholar
Siegel, R., DeSantis, C., & Jemal, A. (2014). Colorectal cancer statistics, 2014. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 64, 104–117.Google Scholar
Singer, E., Antonucci, T., & Van Hoewyk, J. (2004). Racial and ethnic variations in knowledge and attitudes about genetic testing. Genetic Testing, 8, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skytte, A. B., Crüger, D., Gerster, M., et al. (2011). Breast cancer after bilateral risk‐reducing mastectomy. Clinical Genetics, 79, 431–437.Google Scholar
Soliman, H. & Agresta, S. V. (2008). Current issues in adolescent and young adult cancer survivorship. Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center, 15, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spencer, D. H., Lockwood, C., Topol, E., Evans, J. P., Green, R. C., Mansfield, E., & Tezak, Z. (2011). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: reliable or risky? Clinical Chemistry, 57, 1641–1644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Storm, C., Agarwal, R., & Offit, K. (2008). Ethical and legal implications of cancer genetic testing: Do physicians have a duty to warn patients’ relatives about possible genetic risks? Journal of Oncology Practice, 4, 229–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sugarman, J. & Rosoff, P. M. (2001). Ethical issues in gamete preservation for children undergoing treatment for cancer. Journal of Andrology, 22, 732–737.Google Scholar
Sussner, K. M., Thompson, H. S., Valdimarsdottir, H. B., Redd, W. H., & Jandorf, L. (2009). Acculturation and familiarity with, attitudes towards and beliefs about genetic testing for cancer risk within Latinas in East Harlem, New York City. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18, 60–71.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. M., Seymour, J. F., O’Brien, T., Sawyer, S. M., & Ashley, D. M. (2006). Adolescent and young adult cancer: A revolution in evolution? Internal Medicine Journal, 36, 302–307.Google Scholar
Thompson, H. S., Valdimarsdottir, H. B., Jandorf, L., & Redd, W. (2003). Perceived disadvantages and concerns about abuses of genetic testing for cancer risk: Differences across African American, Latina and Caucasian women. Patient Education and Counseling, 51, 217–227.Google Scholar
van Oostrom, I., Meijers-Heijboer, H., Lodder, L. N., et al. (2003). Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: A 5-year follow-up study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21, 3867–3874.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, W. H. B., Anderson, R. A., & Irvine, D. S. (2005). Fertility preservation for young patients with cancer: Who is at risk and what can be offered? The Lancet Oncology, 6, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wasteson, E., Sandelin, K., Brandberg, Y., Wickman, M., & Arver, B. (2011). High satisfaction rate ten years after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy – A longitudinal study. European Journal of Cancer Care, 20, 508–513.Google Scholar
Wenzel, L., Dogan-Ates, A., Habbal, R., et al. (2005). Defining and measuring reproductive concerns of female cancer survivors. Journal of the National Cancer Institute monographs, 34, 94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. M. G. & Jungner, G. (1968). Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Winterich, J. A., Quandt, S. A., Grzywacz, J. G., Clark, P. E., Miller, D. P., Acuña, J., & Arcury, T. A. (2008). Masculinity and the body: How African American and white men experience cancer screening exams involving the rectum. American Journal of Men’s Health, 3, 300–309.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×