1
|
Kinney AY, Walters ST, Lin Y, Lu SE, Kim A, Ani J, Heidt E, Le Compte CJ, O'Malley D, Stroup A, Paddock LE, Grumet S, Boyce TW, Toppmeyer DL, McDougall JA. Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow. J Clin Oncol 2023; 41:2767-2778. [PMID: 36787512 PMCID: PMC10414736 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00751] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/04/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN). METHODS In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call. RESULTS Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3; P < .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5; P < .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing. CONCLUSION TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Y. Kinney
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | | | - Yong Lin
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Shou-En Lu
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Arreum Kim
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Julianne Ani
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Emily Heidt
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | | | - Denalee O'Malley
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
- School of Medicine, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
| | - Antoinette Stroup
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Lisa E. Paddock
- Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Sherry Grumet
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Tawny W. Boyce
- UNM Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Le Compte CG, Lu SE, Ani J, McDougall J, Walters ST, Toppmeyer D, Boyce TW, Stroup A, Paddock L, Grumet S, Lin Y, Heidt E, Kinney AY. Understanding cancer genetic risk assessment motivations in a remote tailored risk communication and navigation intervention randomized controlled trial. Health Psychol Behav Med 2022; 10:1190-1215. [PMID: 36518606 PMCID: PMC9744218 DOI: 10.1080/21642850.2022.2150623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2022] [Accepted: 11/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background National guidelines recommend cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) (i.e. genetic counseling prior to genetic testing) for women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Less than one-half of eligible women obtain CGRA, leaving thousands of women and their family members without access to potentially life-saving cancer prevention interventions. Purpose The Genetic Risk Assessment for Cancer Education and Empowerment Project (GRACE) addressed this translational gap, testing the efficacy of a tailored counseling and navigation (TCN) intervention vs. a targeted print brochure vs. usual care on CGRA intentions. Selected behavioral variables were theorized to mediate CGRA intentions. Methods Breast and ovarian cancer survivors meeting criteria for guideline-based CGRA were recruited from three state cancer registries (N = 654), completed a baseline survey, and were randomized. TCN and targeted print arms received the brochure; TCN also participated in a tailored, telephone-based decision coaching and navigation session grounded in the Extended Parallel Process Model and Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Participants completed a one-month assessment. Logistic regression was used to compare the rate of CGRA intentions. CGRA intentions and theorized mediator scores (continuous level variables) were calculated using mixed model analysis. Results CGRA intentions increased for TCN (53.2%) vs. targeted print (26.7%) (OR = 3.129; 95% CI: 2.028, 4.827, p < .0001) and TCN vs. usual care (23.1%) (OR = 3.778, CI: 2.422, 5.894, p < .0001). Perceived risk (p = 0.023) and self-efficacy (p = 0.035) mediated CGRA intentions in TCN. Conclusions Improvements in CGRA intentions and theorized mediators support the use of a tailored communication intervention among women at increased HBOC risk. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03326713.)Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03326713.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Circe Gray Le Compte
- Biobehavioral Cancer Health Equity Research Lab, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Shou-En Lu
- Rutgers Environmental Epidemiology and Statistics, Rutgers University School of Public Health, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Julianne Ani
- Biobehavioral Cancer Health Equity Research Lab, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Jean McDougall
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Preventive Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Scott T. Walters
- Department of Health Behavior and Health Systems, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, TX, USA
| | - Deborah Toppmeyer
- Stacy Goldstein Breast Cancer Center, LIFE Center, Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Tawny W. Boyce
- Biostatistics Shared Resource, UNM Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Antoinette Stroup
- New Jersey State Cancer Registry, Stroup Research Center, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Lisa Paddock
- Cancer Surveillance Research Program, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Sherry Grumet
- LIFE Center, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Yong Lin
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Emily Heidt
- Biobehavioral Cancer Health Equity Research Lab, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - Anita Y. Kinney
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Acharya M, Zorn KK, Simonson ME, Bimali M, Moore GW, Peng C, Martin BC. Statewide trends and factors associated with genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk in Arkansas 2013-2018. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2022; 20:19. [PMID: 35606835 PMCID: PMC9128197 DOI: 10.1186/s13053-022-00226-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early identification of hereditary cancer risk would save lives, but genetic testing (GT) has been inadequate. We assessed i) trends for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch syndrome, and other GT and ii) factors associated with receipt of GT. METHODS We used data from the Arkansas All-Payer Claims Database from January 2013 through June 2018 (commercial, Medicaid), December 2017 (state employee), or December 2016 (Medicare) and identified enrollees with ≥1 month of enrollment. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT-4) codes, rates for GT were calculated per 100,000 person-quarters and time series regressions estimated. Second, GT and covariate information for enrollees with 24 months of continuous enrollment were used to estimate separate logistic regression models for each GT category. RESULTS Among 2,520,575 unique enrollees, HBOC testing rates were 2.2 (Medicaid), 22.0 (commercial), 40.4 (state employee), and 13.1(Medicare) per 100,000 person-quarters and increased linearly across all plans. Older age (OR=1.24; 95%CI 1.20 - 1.28), female sex (OR=18.91; 95%CI 13.01 - 28.86), higher comorbidity burden (OR=1.08; 95%CI 1.05 - 1.12), mental disorders (OR=1.53; 95%CI 1.15 - 2.00), and state employee coverage (OR=1.65; 95%CI 1.37 - 1.97) were positively associated with HBOC testing. Less than 1 of 10,000 enrollees received Lynch syndrome testing, while < 5 of 10,000 received HBOC testing. CONCLUSION GT rates for hereditary cancer syndromes have increased in Arkansas but remain low. Receipt of GT was explained with high discrimination by sex and plan type. IMPACT Expansion of GT for hereditary cancer risk in Arkansas is needed to identify high-risk individuals who could benefit from risk-reduction strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahip Acharya
- Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy, Education II Building 6253, 4301 W. Markham Street, slot 522, Little Rock, AR-72205, United States
| | - Kristin K Zorn
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Medicine, Little Rock, AR, United States
| | - Melinda E Simonson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Medicine, Little Rock, AR, United States
| | - Milan Bimali
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, United States
| | - Gary W Moore
- Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy, Education II Building 6253, 4301 W. Markham Street, slot 522, Little Rock, AR-72205, United States
| | - Cheng Peng
- Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy, Education II Building 6253, 4301 W. Markham Street, slot 522, Little Rock, AR-72205, United States
| | - Bradley C Martin
- Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy, Education II Building 6253, 4301 W. Markham Street, slot 522, Little Rock, AR-72205, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Meiser B, Butow P, Davies G, Napier CE, Schlub TE, Bartley N, Juraskova I, Ballinger ML, Thomas DM, Best MC. Psychological predictors of cancer patients' and their relatives' attitudes towards the return of genomic sequencing results. Eur J Med Genet 2022; 65:104516. [PMID: 35487418 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2022.104516] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2021] [Revised: 03/02/2022] [Accepted: 04/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
This study assessed the psychological predictors of attitudes toward the return of germline genomic sequencing results in cancer patients and their biological relatives with a likely genetic basis for their cancer diagnosis, who completed a questionnaire prior to undergoing genomic sequencing. Of 602 probands and relatives, 94% of probands and 89% of relatives thought people would like to be informed about single-gene conditions for which there is prevention or treatment. Amongst relatives, this view was associated with higher perceived susceptibility and self-efficacy. Probands (66%) and relatives (59%) thought people would be interested in learning about single-gene conditions for which there is no prevention or treatment. Amongst probands, this view was associated with lower tolerance of uncertainty and amongst relatives with higher self-efficacy. Probands (92%) and relatives (90%) thought people would like to be informed about polygenic conditions that can have a major impact on health. Amongst probands this view was associated with lower perceived susceptibility of cancer recurrence, and amongst relatives, with higher perceived susceptibility and self-efficacy. Probands (86%) and relatives (86%) thought that people would like to be informed about polygenic conditions that can have a lower impact on health, and this view was associated with a lower perceived susceptibility of recurrence amongst probands. Inconclusion, these findings show that individuals' attitudes about the return of results depend on the perceived utility of different types of tests. Therefore, individuals need to gain a clear understanding of test utility, and appropriate consent processes are required to achieve informed choices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina Meiser
- Psychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, NSW, 2032, Australia.
| | - Phyllis Butow
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Grace Davies
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Christine E Napier
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia
| | - Timothy E Schlub
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Nicci Bartley
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Ilona Juraskova
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, 2006, Australia
| | - Mandy L Ballinger
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia; St Vincent's Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, NSW, 2032, Australia
| | - David M Thomas
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia; St Vincent's Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, NSW, 2032, Australia
| | - Megan C Best
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, 2006, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Meiser B, Butow P, Davies G, Napier CE, Schlub TE, Bartley N, Juraskova I, Ballinger ML, Thomas DM, Tucker K, Goldstein D, Biesecker BB, Best MC. Psychological predictors of advanced cancer patients' preferences for return of results from comprehensive tumor genomic profiling. Am J Med Genet A 2021; 188:725-734. [PMID: 34755933 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.62563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2021] [Revised: 07/28/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
This study assessed the psychological predictors of preferences for return of comprehensive tumor genomic profiling (CTGP) results in patients with advanced cancers, enrolled in the Molecular Screening and Therapeutics Program. Patients completed a questionnaire prior to undergoing CTGP. Of the 1434 who completed a questionnaire, 96% would like to receive results that can guide treatment for their cancer, and preference for receiving this type of result was associated with lower tolerance of uncertainty. Sixty-four percent would like to receive results that cannot guide treatment, and lower tolerance of uncertainty, self-efficacy, and perceived importance were associated with this preference. Fifty-nine percent would like to receive variants of unknown significance, which was associated with lower tolerance of uncertainty, higher self-efficacy, and perceived importance. Eighty-six percent wanted to receive germline results that could inform family risk. This was associated with higher self-efficacy, perceived importance, and perceived susceptibility. Although most patients wanted to receive all types of results, given the differing patient preferences regarding the return of results depending on the utility of the different types of results, it appears critical to safeguard patient understanding of result utility to achieve informed patient choices. This should be accompanied by appropriate consent processes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bettina Meiser
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Phyllis Butow
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Grace Davies
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Christine E Napier
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Timothy E Schlub
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Nicci Bartley
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Ilona Juraskova
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Mandy L Ballinger
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.,St Vincent's Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David M Thomas
- Cancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia.,St Vincent's Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kathy Tucker
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.,Hereditary Cancer Clinic, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David Goldstein
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of NSW, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.,Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Megan C Best
- Psycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Institute for Ethics and Society, University of Notre Dame Australia, Broadway, New South Wales, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dettwyler SA, Koeppe ES, Jacobs MF, Stoffel EM. Outcomes of retesting in patients with previously uninformative cancer genetics evaluations. Fam Cancer 2021; 21:375-385. [PMID: 34545504 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-021-00276-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2021] [Accepted: 09/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
Advances in cancer genetics have increased germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PV/LPV) detection rates. More data is needed to inform which patients with previously uninformative results could benefit most from retesting, especially beyond breast/ovarian cancer populations. Here, we describe retesting outcomes and predictors of PV/LPVs in a cohort of patients unselected by cancer diagnosis. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted for patients at a cancer genetics clinic between 1998 and 2019 who underwent genetic testing (GT) on ≥ 2 dates with ≥ 1 year between tests, with no PV/LPVs on first-line GT. Demographics, retesting indications, and GT details were reviewed to evaluate predictive factors of PV/LPV identification. 139 patients underwent retesting, of whom 24 (17.3%) had a PV/LPV, encompassing 15 genes. 14 PV/LPV carriers (58.3%) only returned for retesting after personal or familial history changes (typically new cancer diagnoses), while 10 (41.7%) retested due to updated GT availability. No specific GT method was most likely to identify PV/LPVs and no specific clinical factors were predictive of a PV/LPV. The identified PV/LPVs were consistent with patients' personal or family histories, but were discordant with the initial referral indication for GT. For 16 (66.7%) PV/LPV carriers, the genetic diagnosis changed clinical management. This study adds to the limited body of literature on retesting outcomes beyond first-line BRCA analysis alone and confirms the utility of multigene panel testing. Retesting certain affected individuals when updated GT is available could result in earlier PV/LPV identification, significantly impacting screening recommendations and potentially reducing cancer-related morbidity and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Erika S Koeppe
- Michigan Medicine Cancer Genetics Clinic, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | - Elena M Stoffel
- Michigan Medicine Cancer Genetics Clinic, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Smith-Uffen M, Bartley N, Davies G, Best M. Motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing: A systematic review. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2021; 104:1325-1334. [PMID: 33390305 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2020] [Revised: 11/21/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Single-gene testing is associated with psycho-social challenges for cancer patients. Genomic testing may amplify these. The aim of this study was to understand patients' motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing, to enable healthcare providers to support their patients throughout the testing process and interpretation of test results. METHODS Five databases were searched for original peer reviewed research articles published between January 2001 and September 2018 addressing motivation for genomic cancer testing. QualSyst was used to assess quality. RESULTS 182 studies were identified and 17 were included for review. Studies were heterogenous. Both somatic and germline testing were included, and 14 studies used hypothetical scenarios. 3249 participants were analyzed, aged 18 to 94. Most were female and white. The most common diagnoses were breast, ovarian, lung and colorectal cancer. Interest in testing was high. Motivations included ability to predict cancer risk, inform disease management, benefit families, and understand cancer. Barriers included concerns about cost, privacy/confidentiality, clinical utility, and psychological harm. CONCLUSIONS Despite concerns, consumers are interested in cancer genomic testing if it can provide actionable results for themselves and their families. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Providers must manage understanding and expectations of testing and translate genetic information into health-promoting behaviours.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Smith-Uffen
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Nicci Bartley
- Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Grace Davies
- Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Megan Best
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Fear of cancer recurrence in patients undergoing germline genome sequencing. Support Care Cancer 2021; 29:7289-7297. [PMID: 34036439 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06311-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 05/20/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Fear of cancer recurrence/occurrence (FCR/O) is prevalent and associated with poorer psychological outcomes but can also motivate individuals to pursue genomic information about cancer risk. Guided by Protection Motivation Theory, this study investigated FCR/O prevalence and associated factors among probands previously diagnosed with a cancer of likely heritable origin, and their relatives, who had agreed to have germline genome sequencing. METHODS Three hundred and forty-eight probands and 167 relatives completed the Concerns about Recurrence Questionnaire (adapted for occurrence for some relatives) within 1 month of agreeing to undertake genome sequencing. Linear regressions investigated demographic, disease, attitude and behavioral associations with FCR/O. RESULTS Probands demonstrated greater FCR compared to relatives. In probands, greater FCR was associated with being female, non-English speaking at home, less time since diagnosis, greater intention to change behavior if gene variant found, lower perceived ability to cope with results, higher perceived susceptibility to having a recurrence, and more negative attitudes towards uncertainty. For relatives with cancer, greater FCR was associated with being male, greater intention to change behavior if a gene variant found, and higher perceived susceptibility to recurrence. In relatives without cancer, greater FCO was associated with not having had genetic testing prior to this study, lower perceived ability to cope with results, and higher perceived susceptibility to developing cancer. CONCLUSION Current findings on FCR/O prevalence and associated demographic and attitudinal variables in those who pursue genomic risk information might be used to target interventions that can prevent adverse psychological outcomes in vulnerable patients.
Collapse
|
9
|
Allen CG, Peterson S, Khoury MJ, Brody LC, McBride CM. A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact. Transl Behav Med 2021; 11:901-911. [PMID: 32902617 PMCID: PMC8240657 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibaa076] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Since the completion of the Human Genome Project, progress toward translating genomic research discoveries to address population health issues has been limited. Several meetings of social and behavioral scientists have outlined priority research areas where advancement of translational research could increase population health benefits of genomic discoveries. In this review, we track the pace of progress, study size and design, and focus of genomics translational research from 2012 to 2018 and its concordance with five social and behavioral science recommended priorities. We conducted a review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Guidelines for Scoping Reviews. Steps involved completing a search in five databases and a hand search of bibliographies of relevant literature. Our search (from 2012 to 2018) yielded 4,538 unique studies; 117 were included in the final analyses. Two coders extracted data including items from the PICOTS framework. Analysis included descriptive statistics to help identify trends in pace, study size and design, and translational priority area. Among the 117 studies included in our final sample, nearly half focused on genomics applications that have evidence to support translation or implementation into practice (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 applications). Common study designs were cross-sectional (40.2%) and qualitative (24.8%), with average sample sizes of 716 across all studies. Most often, studies addressed public understanding of genetics and genomics (33.3%), risk communication (29.1%), and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change (19.7%). The number of studies that address social and behavioral science priority areas is extremely limited and the pace of this research continues to lag behind basic science advances. Much of the research identified in this review is descriptive and related to public understanding, risk communication, and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change. The field has been slow to develop and evaluate public health-friendly interventions and test implementation approaches that could enable health benefits and equitable access to genomic discoveries. As the completion of the human genome approaches its 20th anniversary, full engagement of transdisciplinary efforts to address translation challenges will be required to close this gap.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin G Allen
- Behavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Shenita Peterson
- Woodruff Health Science Center Library, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Muin J Khoury
- Office of Genomics and Precision Public Health, Office of Science, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Lawrence C Brody
- Gene and Environment Interaction Section, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Colleen M McBride
- Behavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ghanouni A, Sanderson SC, Pashayan N, Renzi C, von Wagner C, Waller J. Attitudes towards risk-stratified breast cancer screening among women in England: A cross-sectional survey. J Med Screen 2019; 27:138-145. [PMID: 31701797 DOI: 10.1177/0969141319883662] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Risk stratification may improve the benefit/harm ratio of breast screening. Research on acceptability among potential invitees is necessary to guide implementation. We assessed women's attitudes towards and willingness to undergo risk assessment and stratified screening. METHODS Women in England aged 40-70 received summary information about the topic, and completed face-to-face computer-assisted interviews. Questions assessed willingness to undergo multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment, more frequent breast screening (if at very high risk), or less frequent or no screening (if at very low risk), and preferences for delivery of assessment results. RESULTS Among 933 women, 85% considered breast cancer risk assessment a good idea, and 74% were willing to have it. Among 125 women unwilling to have risk assessment, reasons commonly related to 'worry' (14%) and 'preferring not to know' (14%). Among those willing to have risk assessment (n = 689), letters/emails were generally preferred (42%) for results about very low-risk status. Face-to-face communication was most commonly preferred for results of very high-risk status (78%). General practitioners were most commonly preferred sources of assessment results (≈40%). Breast cancer specialists were often preferred for results of very high-risk status (38%). Risk-stratified breast screening was considered a good idea by 70% and 89% were willing to have more frequent screening. Fewer would accept less (51%) or no screening (37%) if at very low risk. CONCLUSIONS Women were generally in favour of multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment and risk-stratified screening. Some were unwilling to accept less or no screening if at very low risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Ghanouni
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Nora Pashayan
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Cristina Renzi
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Grady MC, Kolla KA, Peshkin BN. Multigene Cancer Panels: Implications for Pre- and Post-test Genetic Counseling. CURRENT GENETIC MEDICINE REPORTS 2019. [DOI: 10.1007/s40142-019-00173-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
12
|
Haga SB, Kantor A. Horizon Scan Of Clinical Laboratories Offering Pharmacogenetic Testing. Health Aff (Millwood) 2019; 37:717-723. [PMID: 29733708 DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1564] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing involves the analysis of genes known to affect response to medications. The field has been projected as a leading application of personalized or precision medicine, but the use of PGx tests has been stymied, in part, by the lack of clinical evidence of utility and reported low provider awareness. Another factor is the availability of testing. The range and types of PGx tests available have not been assessed to date. In the period September 2017-January 2018 we analyzed the numbers and types of PGx tests offered by clinical testing laboratories in the US. Of the 111 such labs that we identified, we confirmed that 76 offered PGx testing services. Of these, 31 offered only tests for single genes; 30 offered only tests for multiple genes; and 15 offered both types of tests. Collectively, 45 laboratories offered 114 multigene panel tests covering 295 genes. The majority of these tests did not have any clinical guidelines. PGx tests vary in type and makeup, which presents challenges in appropriate test evaluation and selection for providers, insurers, health systems, and patients alike.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susanne B Haga
- Susanne B. Haga ( ) is an associate professor of medicine at the Duke University School of Medicine, in Durham, North Carolina
| | - Ariel Kantor
- Ariel Kantor is an undergraduate research assistant at Duke University
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Chadwell SE, He H, Knapke S, Lewis J, Sisson R, Hopper J. Factors Influencing Clinical Follow-Up for Individuals with a Personal History of Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer and Previous Uninformative BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing. J Genet Couns 2018; 27:1210-1219. [DOI: 10.1007/s10897-018-0241-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2017] [Accepted: 02/18/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
14
|
Vicuña B, Delaney HD, Flores KG, Ballinger L, Royce M, Dayao Z, Pal T, Kinney AY. Preferences for multigene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer risk among ethnically diverse BRCA-uninformative families. J Community Genet 2018; 9:81-92. [PMID: 28971318 PMCID: PMC5752653 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-017-0322-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2017] [Accepted: 08/04/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Until recently, genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer has primarily focused on pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) genes. However, advances in DNA sequencing technologies have made simultaneous testing for multiple genes possible. We examined correlates of interest in multigene panel testing and risk communication preferences in an ethnically diverse sample of women who tested negative for BRCA mutations previously but remain at high risk based on their family history (referred to as "BRCA-uninformative") and their at-risk female family members. Two-hundred and thirteen women with a previous breast cancer diagnosis and a BRCA-uninformative test result and their first-degree relatives completed a survey on interest in multigene panel testing, communication preferences, and sociodemographic, psychological, and clinical factors. Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with testing interest. Chi-square analyses were used to test differences in risk communication preferences. Interest in multigene panel testing was high (84%) and did not considerably differ by cancer status or ethnicity. In multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with interest in genetic testing were having had a mammogram in the past 2 years (odds ratio (OR) = 4.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80-9.02) and high cancer worry (OR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.34-10.60). Overall, the most commonly preferred genetic communication modes were genetic counselors, oncologists, and print materials. However, non-Hispanic women were more likely than Hispanic women to prefer web-based risk communication (p < 0.001). Hispanic and non-Hispanic women from BRCA-uninformative families have a high level of interest in gene panel testing. Cancer-related emotions and communication preferences should be considered in developing targeted genetic risk communication strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Belinda Vicuña
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA
- Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Center for Health Policy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Harold D Delaney
- Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Kristina G Flores
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA
| | - Lori Ballinger
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA
| | - Melanie Royce
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA
| | - Zoneddy Dayao
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA
| | - Tuya Pal
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center/Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Anita Y Kinney
- Cancer Research Facility, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, MSC 07 4025, Albuquerque, NM, 87125, USA.
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Center for Health Policy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
| |
Collapse
|