Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

What do cancer patients’ relatives think about addressing cancer family history and performing genetic testing in palliative care?

European Journal of Human Genetics volume 28, pages 213–221 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Palliative care may be an opportunity to discuss cancer family history and familial cancer risks with patients’ relatives. It may also represent the last opportunity to collect, from dying patients, clinical data and biospecimens that will inform cancer risk assessment and prevention in their surviving relatives. This study aims to explore the perspectives of cancer patients’ relatives about cancer heritability, addressing cancer family history, and performing genetic testing in palliative care settings. Thirteen first-degree relatives of cancer patients who died in palliative care participated in the study. Two focus groups were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Two independent coders conducted a thematic content analysis. The themes included: (1) Knowledge of cancer heritability; (2) Experiences and expectations regarding cancer family history discussions, and (3) Views on genetic testing in palliative care patients and DNA biobanking. Participants seemed aware that cancer family history is a potential risk factor for developing the disease. They considered the palliative care period an inappropriate moment to discuss cancer heritability. They also did not consider palliative care providers as appropriate resources to consult for such matters as they are not specialized in this field. Participants welcomed DNA biobanking and genetic testing conducted at the palliative care patients’ request. Cancer occurrence within families raises concerns among relatives about cancer heritability, but the palliative care period is not considered the most appropriate moment to address this issue. However, discussions about the risk to cancer patients’ relatives might need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pharoah PD, Day NE, Duffy S, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 1997;71:800–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Noe M, Schroy P, Demierre MF, Babayan R, Geller AC. Increased cancer risk for individuals with a family history of prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and melanoma and their associated screening recommendations and practices. Cancer Causes Control. 2008;19:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bevier M, Sundquist K, Hemminki K. Risk of breast cancer in families of multiple affected women and men. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:723–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gonthier C, Pelletier S, Gagnon P, Marin A, Chiquette J, Gagnon B, et al. Issues related to family history of cancer at the end of life: a palliative care providers’ survey. Fam Cancer. 2018;17:303–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dearing A, Taverner N. Mainstreaming genetics in palliative care: barriers and suggestions for clinical genetic services. J Community Genet. 2018;9:243–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cleophat JE, Pelletier S, Joly Y, Gagnon P, Dery A, Marin A, et al. Addressing cancer family history at the end of life: How frequent, relevant, and feasible is it?: a survey of palliative care providers. Palliat Med. 2019;33:856–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Niendorf KB, Geller MA, Vogel RI, Church TR, Leininger A, Bakke A, et al. A model for patient-direct screening and referral for familial cancer risk. Fam Cancer. 2016;15:707–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hampel H, Bennett RL, Buchanan A, Pearlman R, Wiesner GL, Guideline Development Group ACoMG. et al. A practice guideline from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors: referral indications for cancer predisposition assessment. Genet Med: Off J Am Coll Med Genet. 2015;17:70–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hartmann LC, Lindor NM. The role of risk-reducing surgery in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. New Engl J Med. 2016;374:454–68.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Roeland EJ, Dullea AD, Hagmann CH, Madlensky L. Addressing hereditary cancer risk at the end of life. J Oncol Pract. 2017;13:e851–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lillie AK, Clifford C, Metcalfe A. Caring for families with a family history of cancer: why concerns about genetic predisposition are missing from the palliative agenda. Palliat Med. 2011;25:117–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ingleby LJ. Clinical genetics in a palliative care setting: a qualitative exploration of the barriers and levers staff report when discussing family risk of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Leicester: University of Leicester; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Metcalfe A, Pumphrey R, Clifford C. Hospice nurses and genetics: implications for end-of-life care. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:192–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Quillin JM, Bodurtha JN, Siminoff LA, Smith TJ. Physicians’ current practices and opportunities for DNA banking of dying patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2011;7:183–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Abusamaan MS, Quillin JM, Owodunni O, Emidio O, Kang IG, Yu B, et al. The role of palliative medicine in assessing hereditary cancer risk. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2018;35:1490–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Quillin JM, Emidio O, Ma B, Bailey L, Smith TJ, Kang IG, et al. High-risk palliative care patients’ knowledge and attitudes about hereditary cancer testing and DNA banking. J Genet Couns. 2018;27:834–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lillie A. The missing discourse:how does the family history of cancer affect the care needs of palliative care patients? Birmingham: University of Birmingham; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Krakow M, Ratcliff CL, Hesse BW, Greenberg-Worisek AJ. Assessing genetic literacy awareness and knowledge gaps in the US population: results from the health information national trends survey. Public Health Genomics. 2017;20:343–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups BMJ. 1995;311:299–302.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Saulnier KM, Chan B, Cinà M, Pelletier S, Dorval M, Joly Y. Communication of genetic information in the palliative care context: ethical and legal issues. Med Law Int. 2018;18:219–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Reid GT, Walter FM, Brisbane JM, Emery JD. Family history questionnaires designed for clinical use: a systematic review. Public Health Genomics. 2009;12:73–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Cleophat JE, Nabi H, Pelletier S, Bouchard K, Dorval M. What characterizes cancer family history collection tools? A critical literature review. Curr Oncol. 2018;25:e335–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. de Hoog CL, Portegijs PJ, Stoffers HE. Family history tools for primary care are not ready yet to be implemented. A systematic review. Eur J Gen Pract. 2014;20:125–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Qureshi N, Carroll JC, Wilson B, Santaguida P, Allanson J, Brouwers M, et al. The current state of cancer family history collection tools in primary care: a systematic review. Genet Med. 2009;11:495–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Sue-Ling Chang for linguistic editing of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the Fonds de Recherche du Québec-Santé and the Direction générale de Cancérologie du Québec. JEC is a recipient of scholarships from the Fonds d’Enseignement et de Recherche (Faculty of Pharmacy, Laval University), Laval University Cancer Research Center, Laval University Research Chair in Palliative Care, and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec-Santé. HN holds an Investigator Award (Junior 2) from the Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CHU de Québec-Laval University Research Center, Oncology Division, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Jude E. Cléophat, Sylvie Pelletier, Pierre Gagnon, Jocelyne Chiquette, Bruno Gagnon, Hermann Nabi & Michel Dorval

  2. Faculty of Pharmacy, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Jude E. Cléophat & Michel Dorval

  3. Laval University Cancer Research Center, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Jude E. Cléophat, Pierre Gagnon, Jocelyne Chiquette, Bruno Gagnon, Hermann Nabi & Michel Dorval

  4. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sherbrooke University, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

    Ana Marin

  5. CHU de Québec–Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Ana Marin, Jocelyne Chiquette & Louis Roy

  6. CISSS de Chaudière-Appalaches, Ste-Marie, QC, Canada

    Ana Marin

  7. Center of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Yann Joly

  8. Department of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Pierre Gagnon

  9. Quebec Palliative Care Association, Granby, QC, Canada

    Alberte Déry

  10. Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada

    Jocelyne Chiquette, Bruno Gagnon & Hermann Nabi

  11. Jewish General Hospital, Palliative Care Unit, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Vasiliki Bitzas

  12. French National Institute of Health and Medical Research Institute, Epidemiology and Population Health Research Center, INSERM U.1018, Villejuif, France

    Hermann Nabi

  13. CISSS de Chaudière-Appalaches Research Center, Lévis, QC, Canada

    Michel Dorval

Authors
  1. Jude E. Cléophat
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ana Marin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sylvie Pelletier
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yann Joly
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pierre Gagnon
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alberte Déry
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jocelyne Chiquette
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Bruno Gagnon
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Louis Roy
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Vasiliki Bitzas
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Hermann Nabi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Michel Dorval
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Dorval.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Research Ethics Review Board of the CHU de Québec-Université Laval (Quebec City University Hospital-Laval University). During the recruitment process, participants were provided with information about the study and on their rights and responsibilities. Each participant signed a consent form before the focus group. First names only were used during group discussions to maintain confidentiality. To report participants’ quotes, first names were replaced by numbers. Participants were informed that research team members (JEC, AM, HN, MD, SP) would be observing the focus group sessions behind a one-way mirror to record field notes.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cléophat, J.E., Marin, A., Pelletier, S. et al. What do cancer patients’ relatives think about addressing cancer family history and performing genetic testing in palliative care?. Eur J Hum Genet 28, 213–221 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0505-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0505-3

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links