The impact of genetic counseling on patient engagement in a specialty cancer clinic

Genetic counseling access and service delivery in New York State is variable for parents of infants with complex CFTR genotypes conferring uncertain phenotypes

BACKGROUND

New York State (NYS) utilizes a three-tiered cystic fibrosis newborn screening (CFNBS) algorithm that includes cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene sequencing. Infants with >1 CFTR variant of potential clinical relevance, including variants of uncertain significance or varying clinical consequence are referred for diagnostic evaluation at NYS cystic fibrosis (CF) Specialty Care Centers (SCCs).

AIMS

As part of ongoing quality improvement efforts, demographic, screening, diagnostic, and clinical data were evaluated for 289 CFNBS-positive infants identified in NYS between December 2017 and November 2020 who did not meet diagnostic criteria for CF and were classified as either: CFTR-related metabolic syndrome/CF screen positive, inconclusive diagnosis (CRMS/CFSPID) or CF carriers.

RESULTS

Overall, 194/289 (67.1%) had CFTR phasing to confirm whether the infant's CFTR variants were in cis or in trans. Eighteen complex alleles were identified in cis; known haplotypes (p.R117H+5T, p.F508del+p.L467F, and p.R74W+p.D1270N) were the most common identified. Thirty-two infants (16.5%) with all variants in cis were reclassified as CF carriers rather than CRMS/CFSPID. Among 263 infants evaluated at an NYS SCC, 70.3% were reported as having received genetic counseling about their results by any provider, with 96/263 (36.5%) counseled by a certified genetic counselor.

CONCLUSION

Given the particularly complex genetic interpretation of results generated by CFNBS algorithms including sequencing analysis, additional efforts are needed to ensure families of infants with a positive CFNBS result have CFTR phasing when needed to distinguish carriers from infants with CRMS/CFSPID, and access to genetic counseling to address implications of CFNBS results.

Systematic evidence review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with cancer genetic counseling

PURPOSE

Genetic counseling (GC) is standard of care in genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). A rigorous assessment of the data reported from published studies is crucial to ensure the evidence-based implementation of GC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 patient-reported and health-services-related outcomes associated with pre- and post-test GC in GCRA in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of 5393 screened articles met inclusion criteria. No articles reporting post-test GC outcomes met inclusion criteria. For patient-reported outcomes, pre-test GC significantly decreased worry, increased knowledge, and decreased perceived risk but did not significantly affect patient anxiety, depression, decisional conflict, satisfaction, or intent to pursue genetic testing. For health-services outcomes, pre-test GC increased correct genetic test ordering, reduced inappropriate services, increased spousal support for genetic testing, and expedited care delivery but did not consistently improve cancer prevention behaviors nor lead to accurate risk assessment. The GRADE certainty in the evidence was very low or low. No included studies elucidated GC effect on mortality, cascade testing, cost-effectiveness, care coordination, shared decision making, or patient time burden.

CONCLUSION

The true impact of GC on relevant outcomes is not known low quality or absent evidence. Although a meta-analysis found that pre-test GC had beneficial effects on knowledge, worry, and risk perception, the certainty of this evidence was low according to GRADE methodology. Further studies are needed to support the evidence-based application of GC in GCRA.

Decision-making processes behind seeking regular cardiac checkups for individuals with Marfan syndrome: A grounded theory study

Patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) present with various symptoms, such as aortic aneurysm/dissection, tall stature, and lens deviation. Among them, acute aortic dissection is a complication that leads to sudden death. Some individuals with MFS are reluctant to see a cardiologist and discontinue regular checkups until they develop life-threatening complications. We conducted a grounded theory study to investigate how individuals with MFS decided whether to adhere to healthcare recommendations, specifically to attend cardiology appointments. The study recruited individuals with a clinical or genetic diagnosis of MFS from a Japanese university hospital and individuals from a support group. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 28 consenting participants. In this study, we identified the decision-making processes of individuals with MFS concerning their cardiology visits. We extracted "perception of the gap between their health status and medical recommendations" as the central category. This decision-making process consisted of three parts: (A) the process by which an individual with MFS sees a cardiologist for the first time, (B) the process by which an individual with MFS keeps up with cardiology checkups, and (C) the process by which parents bring their children with MFS to the cardiologist. Individuals who learned of the possibility of MFS decided whether to adhere to medical recommendations depending on how they perceived the gap between their health status and the medical recommendations. In addition to medical information and treatment experience, adaptation to MFS, which changed through interactions with others, influenced the perception of the gap. This study suggests the role of genetic counseling and molecular genetic diagnosis as factors that may facilitate adaptation to MFS. The involvement of genetic counselors is important for helping individuals with MFS keep up with regular checkups while affirming their own experiences. These results provide insight into adherence to medical recommendations for individuals with MFS.

Management of breast cancer patients with BRCA gene mutations in Jordan: perspectives and challenges

BACKGROUND

This paper explores and discusses local challenges oncologists face for diagnosing and managing breast cancer patients with BRCA gene mutations in Jordan.

METHODS

A task force involving key opinion leaders, experts in the management of breast cancer, and stakeholders in healthcare systems where genetic testing is available in Jordan discussed current evidence and local real-life practice. The task force then formulated recommendations to achieve better patient outcomes and satisfaction based on evidence-based medicine and their clinical experience in BRCA-mutated breast cancer management.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Eligibility of patients for genetic testing, physician acceptance and willingness to integrate genetic testing into routine practice is encouraging but remains restricted by testing availability and financial coverage. Until more data is available, genetic testing should be targeted for breast cancer patients based on tumor subtypes, as well as family and personal history of cancer, as per international guidelines. Whenever possible, genetic testing should aim to detect all actionable genes through a multigene panel including BRCA1/2. Major challenges faced in clinical practice in Jordan include fear of genetic discrimination and social stigmatization, as well as hesitancy toward risk-reducing surgery. Pre-testing counseling is therefore critical to promote acceptance of genetic testing. Since geneticists are in short supply in Jordan, genetic counseling can be offered through a specially trained genetic counselor or through a hybrid system that includes oncologist-based counselling. In addition to cancer prevention, germline genetic testing may assist in the selection of specific anti-cancer therapy, such as PARP inhibitors, in patients with BRCA1/2 mutation. Nationwide initiatives are also needed to ensure access to PARP inhibition therapy and provide financial coverage for genetic screening, mastectomies and reconstructive surgery across Jordan.

Strength of the genetic counselor: patient relationship is associated with extent of increased empowerment in patients with arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy

Genetic testing and genetic counseling (GC) are increasingly recommended in the cardiovascular setting, with multiple guidelines recommending GC for patients with or at risk for inherited cardiovascular conditions. There are scant data, however, describing patient outcomes to guide evidence-based care. No studies have quantified the influence of the strength of the genetic counselor:patient relationship on outcomes. Individuals referred for first time GC at the Johns Hopkins Arrhythmogenic Cardiomyopathy (ACM) center were surveyed prior to their visit and immediately after, before any genetic test results ordered at the session had been returned. Outcomes and measures were selected based on the Reciprocal Engagement Model of GC and include empowerment assessed by the Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS), anxiety assessed by the Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire (CAQ), and genetic counselor:patient therapeutic alliance assessed by the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI-SR). Response rate was 59% (120/203). 54 (45%) of patients had genetic testing ordered prior to their GC visit. There was a significant increase in GCOS score (mean 15.7 points) within 4 weeks post-GC session (p<.0001) with no significant difference in GCOS change between patients who had genetic testing ordered previously and those attending pre-test counseling (17.4 ± 18.2 versus. 14.1 ± 16 [p=.35]). Average CAQ score was high at baseline (1.67 ± 0.68), and there was a significant inverse relationship between pre-GC CAQ score and extent of increase in GCOS score (p=.008) post-GC. Controlling for baseline anxiety, there was a strong positive relationship between the WAI-SR score and GCOS change (B = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.43, 1.17, p<.001). These results demonstrate a significant increase in empowerment after GC in ACM patients and that this outcome is not reliant on the ordering of a genetic test but instead sensitive to the quality of the genetic counselor:patient relationship. Genetic counselors can strive to further improve empowerment by focusing on reducing pre-visit anxiety and alliance building with the patient.

Telehealth technology: Reducing barriers for rural residents seeking genetic counseling

Many rural residents do not receive genetic counseling or testing when needed because of health care access barriers, such as lack of providers in rural areas and the requirement for rural residents to travel to larger cities for these services. Telehealth technology can reduce these barriers by allowing rural residents to receive genetic counseling through a two-way interactive audio/video secure connection in a local clinic setting or in their homes. Telegenetics is a satisfactory solution for both patient and provider and provides benefits for rural patients despite ethical, legal, and reimbursement considerations.

Germline and Somatic Tumor Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations on genetic and tumor testing for women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer based on available evidence and expert consensus.

METHODS

A literature search and prospectively defined study selection criteria sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and comparative observational studies published from 2007 through 2019. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 19 eligible studies. The evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, and RCTs.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer should have germline genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. In women who do not carry a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant, somatic tumor testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants should be performed. Women with identified germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes should be offered treatments that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in the upfront and the recurrent setting. Women diagnosed with clear cell, endometrioid, or mucinous ovarian cancer should be offered somatic tumor testing for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). Women with identified dMMR should be offered FDA-approved treatment based on these results. Genetic evaluations should be conducted in conjunction with health care providers familiar with the diagnosis and management of hereditary cancer. First- or second-degree blood relatives of a patient with ovarian cancer with a known germline pathogenic cancer susceptibility gene variant should be offered individualized genetic risk evaluation, counseling, and genetic testing. Clinical decision making should not be made based on a variant of uncertain significance. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer should have testing at the time of diagnosis.

Genetic Counseling and the Central Tenets of Practice

Genetic counseling is a profession growing and evolving at an extraordinary rate. This growth is driven by an explosion in what we know, as a result of progress in science, technology, and bioinformatics, and an explosion in what we do not know, as we strive to understand the impact of genomic information on the lives of our patients and clients. Genetic counselors work in an increasing number of subspecialties and diversity of settings. But although the field has evolved, it has maintained a remarkably unchanged core of shared values and beliefs. The heart of genetic counseling practice is the therapeutic relationship, with its dual role of providing information and facilitating assimilation of that information to personalize health-related decision-making and foster successful adaptation. Genetic counseling aims to communicate cutting-edge genomic science within an empathic understanding of the client/patient's concerns and needs. In pursuit of these goals, further assessment of genetic counseling's effectiveness is needed to facilitate evidence-based practices and to scale counseling resources.