Cited by 114BRCA gene mutations in cancerCancer survivorship and careFamily Support in Illness

Psychological Distress, Anxiety, and Depression of Cancer‐Affected BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: a Systematic Review

Open access
Ringwald, Johanna, Wochnowski, Christina, Bosse, Kristin, Giel, Katrin Elisabeth, Schäffeler, Norbert, Zipfel, Stephan, Teufel, Martin·2016·Journal of Genetic Counseling

Abstract

Understanding the intermediate‐ and long‐term psychological consequences of genetic testing for cancer patients has led to encouraging research, but a clear consensus of the psychosocial impact and clinical routine for cancer‐affected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers is still missing. We performed a systematic review of intermediate‐ and long‐term studies investigating the psychological impact like psychological distress, anxiety, and depression in cancer‐affected BRCA mutation carriers compared to unaffected mutation carriers. This review included the screening of 1243 studies. Eight intermediate‐ and long‐term studies focusing on distress, anxiety, and depression symptoms among cancer‐affected mutation carriers at least six months after the disclosure of genetic testing results were included. Studies reported a great variety of designs, methods, and patient outcomes. We found evidence indicating that cancer‐affected mutation carriers experienced a negative effect in relation to psychological well‐being in terms of an increase in symptoms of distress, anxiety, and depression in the first months after test disclosure. In the intermediate‐ and long‐term, no significant clinical relevant symptoms occurred. However, none of the included studies used specific measurements, which can clearly identify psychological burdens of cancer‐affected mutation carriers. We concluded that current well‐implemented distress screening instruments are not sufficient for precisely identifying the psychological burden of genetic testing. Therefore, future studies should implement coping strategies, specific personality structures, the impact of genetic testing, supportive care needs and disease management behaviour to clearly screen for the possible intermediate‐ and long‐term psychological impact of a positive test disclosure.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10897-016-9949-6

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are particularly likely to experience higher levels of distress, anxiety, and depression compared to non-carriers following the announcement of the genetic test result.

    “two systematic reviews found higher levels of distress, anxiety, and depression in carriers compared to non-carriers following the announcement of the genetic test result [17, 18].”

    From Fear of cancer recurrence in breast cancer survivors carrying a BRCA1 or 2 genetic mutation : a cross-sectional study (2024) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Distress section (page unavailable) reports higher distress in mutation carriers than non-carriers during the first six months after testing. The Anxiety and Depression section (page unavailable) reports higher scores in some studies, but the findings are inconsistent; the review does not establish that carriers generally have higher levels of all three outcomes than non-carriers. Its focus is also cancer-affected carriers, rather than all BRCA1/2 carriers. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ringwald, J., Wochnowski, C., Bosse, K., Giel, K. E., Schäffeler, N., Zipfel, S., & Teufel, M.
Affiliations
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Ringwald, Johanna
Venue
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-04-14
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
880-891
ISSN
  • 1059-7700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3599
OpenAlex
W2340539776
Cited by
114
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Genetic Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Athene programme, Ministry of Science Baden-Wuerttemberg and the European Social Fund
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
Keywords
BRCA1 mutation carriers, BRCA2 mutation carriers, psychological distress, anxiety, depression, cancer patients, psychosocial impact, long-term mental health outcomes, coping strategies, supportive care needs
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Genetic Testing, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Mutation, Neoplasms, Stress, Psychological, BRCA1 Protein, BRCA2 Protein, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review