Parents' experiences with large-scale sequencing for genetic predisposition in pediatric renal cancer: A qualitative study

Update on Genetic Counselor Practice and Recommendations for Pediatric Cancer Predisposition Evaluation and Surveillance

In July 2023, the American Association for Cancer Research held the second Childhood Cancer Predisposition Workshop, at which international experts in pediatric cancer predisposition met to update the previously published 2017 consensus statements on pediatric cancer predisposition syndromes. Since 2017, advances in tumor and germline genetic testing and increased understanding of cancer predisposition in patients with pediatric cancer have led to significant changes in clinical care. Here, we provide an updated genetic counseling framework for pediatric oncology professionals. The framework includes referral indications and timing, somatic and germline genetic testing options, testing for adult-onset cancer predisposition syndromes in children with and without cancer, evolving genetic counseling models to meet the increased demand for genetic testing, barriers to cancer genetic testing and surveillance in children, and psychosocial and equity considerations regarding cancer genetic testing and surveillance in children. Adaptable genetic counseling services are needed to provide support to pediatric oncology provider teams and diverse patients with pediatric cancer, cancer predisposition, and their families.

Parents' and patients' perspectives, experiences, and preferences for germline genetic or genomic testing of children with cancer: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Germline testing in pediatric cancer presents opportunities and challenges. Understanding family perspectives, experiences, and preferences will optimize integration into routine care.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we searched 4 databases for studies exploring perspectives, experiences, and preferences of parents/caregivers and/or patients regarding germline testing of children with cancer. Qualitative and quantitative data were extracted, organized, and summarized by research question and themes.

RESULTS

We identified 2286 unique articles, of which 24 were included. Interest in and uptake of testing was high. Families were motivated by altruism and a desire for inheritance/causation information. Testing barriers included psychological concerns, timing of the testing approach if offered at diagnosis or in a high-risk cancer setting and privacy/discrimination. Testing experiences highlighted challenges yet also positive impacts, with results providing psychological relief and informing proactive decision making. Timing preferences varied; however, allowing time to adjust to a new diagnosis was a common theme. Most wanted to receive as many germline sequencing-related results as possible.

CONCLUSION

Findings underscore the importance of integrating germline analyses into pediatric cancer care with flexibility and support for families facing challenges. Where possible, consent should be provided at a time that suits each family's situation with access to information aligning with their needs and preferences.

PROSPERO

CRD42023444890.

The psychological impact of genetic testing in childhood cancer: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Cancer predisposition syndromes are being more frequently recognized in the etiology of pediatric oncology and genetic-related technologies are evolving rapidly, leading to an increasing availability of genetic testing for families. This systematic review assessed the psychological impact of genetic testing on children and parents in the context of childhood cancer.

METHODS

Searches were performed using three databases (Web of Science, Pubmed and Embase) to identify relevant empirical studies. Following Cochrane guidelines, we screened 3838 articles and identified 18 eligible studies, representing the perspectives of children and/or parents.

RESULTS

The included studies described the impact of genetic testing in different contexts (e.g. predictive testing and diagnostic testing) and in different subgroups, (e.g. carriers and non-carriers). Overall, the studies did not identify clinically-relevant long-term increases in negative emotions (depression, anxiety, distress, uncertainty, guilt) as a result of genetic testing. Negative emotions were typically time-limited and generally occurred in families with particular characteristics (e.g. those with a history of multiple cancer diagnoses, families receiving an unfavorable result for one child and a favorable result in siblings, and those with pre-existing mental health difficulties). Positive emotions (hopefulness, relief and peace of mind) were also reported. Knowing their genetic risk status appeared to help to foster empowerment among families, regardless of the result and any associated emotions.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic testing in pediatric oncology does not appear to cause significant additional harm and can lead to positive outcomes. Clinicians need to be especially attentive when counseling families at increased risk of distress.