Germline intragenic mutations in PTEN are associated with 80% of patients with Cowden syndrome (CS) and 60% of patients with Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome (BRRS). The underlying genetic causes remain to be determined in a considerable proportion of classic CS and BRRS without a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-detectable PTEN mutation. We hypothesized that gross gene deletions and mutations in the PTEN promoter might alternatively account for a subset of apparently mutation-negative patients with CS and BRRS. Using real time and multiplex PCR techniques, we identified three germline hemizygous PTEN deletions in 122 apparently mutation-negative patients with classic CS (N=95) or BRRS (N=27). Fine mapping suggested that one deletion encompassed the whole gene and the other two included exon 1 and encompassed exons 1-5 of PTEN, respectively. Two patients with the deletion were diagnosed with BRRS, and one patient with the deletion was diagnosed with BRRS/CS overlap (features of both). Thus 3 (11%) of 27 patients with BRRS or BRRS/CS-overlap had PTEN deletions. Analysis of the PTEN promoter revealed nine cases (7.4%) harboring heterozygous germline mutations. All nine had classic CS, representing almost 10% of all subjects with CS. Eight had breast cancers and/or benign breast tumors but, otherwise, oligo-organ involvement. PTEN protein analysis, from one deletion-positive and five PTEN-promoter-mutation-positive samples, revealed a 50% reduction in protein and multiple bands of immunoreactive protein, respectively. In contrast, control samples showed only the expected band. Further, an elevated level of phosphorylated Akt was detected in the five promoter-mutation-positive samples, compared with controls, indicating an absence of or marked reduction in functional PTEN. These data suggest that patients with BRRS and CS without PCR-detected intragenic PTEN mutations be offered clinical deletion analysis and promoter-mutation analysis, respectively.

Over the past two decades, disability activists, ethicists, and genetic counselors have examined the moral complexities inherent in prenatal genetic counseling and considered whether and in what ways genetic counseling may negatively affect individuals in the disability community. Many have expressed concerns about defining disability in the context of prenatal decision-making, as the definition presented may influence prenatal choices. In the past few years, publications have begun to explore the responsibility of counselors in presenting a balanced view of disability and have questioned the preparedness of counselors for this duty. Currently, the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling (ACGC) only minimally includes disability training in their competencies for genetic counselors, and in their accreditation requirements for training programs. In an attempt to describe current practice, this article details two studies that assess disability training in ABGC-accredited genetic counseling programs. Results from these studies demonstrate that experience with disability is not required by the majority of programs prior to matriculation. Though most program directors agree on the importance of including disability training in the curriculum, there is wide variability in the amount and types of training students receive. Hours dedicated to disability exposure among programs ranged from 10 to 600 hours. Eighty-five percent of program directors surveyed agree that skills for addressing disability should be added to the core competencies. Establishing a set of disability competencies would help to ensure that all graduates have the skills necessary to provide patients with an accurate understanding of disability that facilitates informed decision-making.

This essay examines the possible systematic bias against the disabled in the structure and practice of genetic counseling. Finding that the profession's "nondirective" imperative remains problematic, the authors recommend that methodology developed by feminist standpoint epistemology be used to incorporate the perspective of disabled individuals in genetic counselors' education and practice, thereby reforming society's view of the disabled and preventing possible negative effects of genetic counseling on the self-concept and material circumstance of disabled individuals.

Objective: To determine whether prior success in recruiting African Americans to an in-house cancer genetics registry could be duplicated when recruiting to a national registry requiring a significantly increased level of commitment. Additionally, to determine which recruitment sources and practices yielded the highest number of African American participants. Methods: A retrospective analysis of recruitment sources, practices, and results for recruitment to the Cancer Genetics Network (CGN; a national research registry), from 2000 to 2005 was conducted. These results were compared to previous experience in recruiting African Americans to the Family Cancer Registry (FCR; an in-house registry) during the period 1992–2005. Results: In the 1st year of recruitment to the CGN, African Americans accounted for 24% of those consenting to participate in the CGN registry from our center. This compares to an average annual rate of 27% for the FCR during the years 1998–2005, and a rate of less than 1% from 1992 to 1998. By 2005, African Americans accounted for 27% of CGN participants recruited through the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, one of eighteen participating institutions in the CGN. Hospital-based resources such as cancer treatment clinics and tumor registries yielded the highest percentage of African American participants (66.5%), and self-referral yielded the lowest (0%). Seventy-seven percent of African Americans were actively sought out and recruited from treatment clinics, whereas the vast majority of Caucasian participants were recruited passively during the course of genetic counseling sessions that were scheduled for reasons unrelated to participation in cancer research. There were no known instances of African Americans contacting CGN staff after reading printed recruitment materials or internet advertisements. Conclusions: The increased level of commitment required of CGN participants did not deter African Americans from participating in cancer genetics research. Recruitment strategies responsible for dramatically increasing recruitment rates to the FCR from 1998 to 2000 were equally effective when used for recruitment to the CGN. The most effective recruitment sources were high-yield venues such as cancer treatment clinics and tumor registries, and active recruitment methods yielded the highest number of African American participants. Advertising through internet announcements and printed recruitment materials did not appear to be effective.