Counselees' Perspectives of Genomic Counseling Following Online Receipt of Multiple Actionable Complex Disease and Pharmacogenomic Results: a Qualitative Research Study

British South Asian ancestry participants views of pharmacogenomics clinical implementation and research: a thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

South Asian ancestry populations are underrepresented in genomic studies and therapeutics trials. British South Asians suffer from multi-morbidity leading to polypharmacy. Our objective was to elucidate British South Asian ancestry community perspectives on pharmacogenomic implementation and sharing pharmacogenomic clinical data for research.

METHODS

Four focus groups were conducted (9-12 participants in each). Two groups were mixed gender, while one group was male only and one was female only. Simultaneous interpretation was available to participants in Urdu and Bengali. Focus groups were recorded and abridged transcription and thematic analysis were undertaken.

RESULTS

There were 42 participants, 64% female. 26% were born in the UK or Europe. 52% were born in Bangladesh and 17% in Pakistan. 36% reported university level education. Implementation of pharmacogenomics was perceived to be beneficial to individuals but pose a risk of overburdening resource limited systems. Pharmacogenomic research was perceived to be beneficial to the community, with concerns about data privacy and misuse. Data sharing was desirable if the researchers did not have a financial stake, and benefits would be shared. Trust was the key condition for the acceptability of both clinical implementation and research. Trust was linked with medication compliance. Education, outreach, and communication facilitate trust.

CONCLUSIONS (SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY)

Pharmacogenomics implementation with appropriate education and communication has the potential to enhance trust and contribute to increased medication compliance. Trust drives data sharing, which would enable enhanced representation in research. Representation in scientific evidence base could cyclically enhance trust and compliance.

Genetic counseling and testing for females at elevated risk for breast cancer: Protocol for the randomized controlled trial of the Know Your Risk intervention

BACKGROUND

Genetic counseling and testing have an important role in the care of patients at elevated risk for breast cancer. However, conventional pre- and post-test genetic counseling is labor and time intensive, less accessible for patients living outside major urban centers, and impractical on a large scale. A patient-driven approach to genetic counseling and testing may increase access, improve patients' experiences, affect efficiency of clinical practice, and help meet workforce demand. The objective of this 2-arm randomized controlled trial is to determine the efficacy of Know Your Risk (KYR), a genetic counseling patient preference intervention.

METHODS

Females (n = 1000) at elevated risk (>20% lifetime) for breast cancer will be randomized to the KYR intervention or conventional genetic counseling. The study will provide comprehensive assessment of breast cancer risk by multigene panel testing and validated polygenic risk score. Primary outcome is adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for a clinical encounter every 6-12 months and an annual mammogram (breast MRI if recommended) determined by medical record review. Secondary outcomes include adherence to other recommended cancer screening tests determined by medical record review and changes in breast cancer knowledge, perception of risk, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling by completion of three surveys during the study. Study aims will be evaluated for non-inferiority of the KYR intervention compared to conventional genetic counseling.

CONCLUSION

If efficacious, the KYR intervention has the potential to improve patients' experience and may change how genetic counseling is delivered, inform best practices, and reduce workforce burden.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.govNCT05325151.

Patient Recommendations for the Content and Design of Electronic Returns of Genetic Test Results: Interview Study Among Patients Who Accessed Their Genetic Test Results via the Internet

BACKGROUND

Genetic test results will be increasingly made available electronically as more patient-facing tools are developed; however, little research has been done that collects data on patient preferences for content and design before creating results templates.

OBJECTIVE

This study identifies patient preferences for the electronic return of genetic test results, including what considerations should be prioritized for content and design.

METHODS

Following user-centered design methods, 59 interviews were conducted by using semistructured protocols. The interviews explored the content and design issues of patient portals that facilitated the return of test results to patients. We interviewed patients who received electronic results for specific types of genetics tests (pharmacogenetic tests, hereditary blood disorder tests, and tests for the risk of heritable cancers) or electronically received any type of genetic or nongenetic test results.

RESULTS

In general, many of participants felt that there always needed to be some clinician involvement in electronic result returns and that electronic coversheets with simple summaries would be helpful for facilitating this. Coversheet summaries could accompany, but not replace, the more detailed report. Participants had specific suggestions for such results summaries, such as only reporting the information that was the most important for patients to understand, including next steps, and doing so by using clear language that is free of medical jargon. Electronic result returns should also include explicit encouragement for patients to contact health care providers about questions. Finally, many participants preferred to manage their care by using their smartphones, particularly in instances when they needed to access health information on the go.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants recommended that a patient-friendly front section should accompany the more detailed report and made suggestions for organization, content, and wording. Many used their smartphones regularly to access test results; therefore, health systems and patient portal software vendors should accommodate smartphone app design and web portal design concomitantly when developing platforms for returning results.

Genetic counseling access for parents of newborns who screen positive for cystic fibrosis: Consensus guidelines

INTRODUCTION

A risk associated with cystic fibrosis newborn screening (CFNBS) is parental misunderstanding of genetic information generated by the over 6600 positive screens reported annually in the United States. CFNBS algorithms incorporating DNA analysis can generate genetic information that requires clinical interpretation and has significance for the newborn, parents, and other relatives. Engagement between CF care centers and trained genetic counseling providers, such as licensed and/or certified genetic counselors (GCs), is variable and limited in providing information to CFNBS positive (CFNBS+) families.

METHODS

Using a modified Delphi process, a workgroup of CFNBS experts developed recommendation statements for engagement of genetic counseling services in CF care centers where CFNBS + diagnostic evaluations are performed. Statements were assessed over three rounds of surveys, one face-to-face meeting, and through public feedback.

RESULTS

Seventeen statements achieved >80% consensus (range: 82%-100%). The workgroup affirmed prior CFF policy statements recommending genetic counseling for parents of infants with CFNBS+. The remaining statements addressed infrastructure and logistics of genetic counseling services, including defining appropriate training for genetic counseling providers and counseling content, establishing a path to equal access to genetic counseling providers across CF care centers, and setting a standard for client-centered CFNBS genetic counseling that is respectful of diverse patient needs and autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of client-centered genetic counseling for CFNBS+ families in CF care centers by providers with expertise in both CF and genetic counseling will require efforts to further define core concepts, enhance the education of providers, and develop opportunities for access via telemedicine.

Application of the community dialogues method to identify ethical values and priorities related to pharmacogenomics

Given the expansion of genetics in medicine, there is a growing need to develop approaches to engage patients in understanding how genetics affects their health. Various qualitative methods have been applied to gain a deeper understanding of patient perspectives in topics related to genetics. Community dialogues (CD) are a bi-directional research method that invites community members to discuss a pertinent, challenging topic over the course of a multi-week period and the community members openly discuss their positions on the topic. Authors discuss the first application of the CD method to the topic of pharmacogenetics testing. Additional CD are needed to engage diverse participant populations on this topic to improve genetics literacy, enhance physician engagement and drive policy change.

Implementation outcomes of Humanwide: integrated precision health in team-based family practice primary care

Background

Humanwide was precision health embedded in primary care aiming to leverage high-tech and high-touch medicine to promote wellness, predict and prevent illness, and tailor treatment to individual medical and psychosocial needs.

Methods

We conducted a study assessing implementation outcomes to inform spread and scale, using mixed methods of semi-structured interviews with diverse stakeholders and chart reviews.

Humanwide included: 1) health coaching; 2) four digital health tools for blood-pressure, weight, glucose, and activity; 3) pharmacogenomic testing; and 4) genetic screening/testing. We examined implementation science constructs: reach/penetration, acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability. Chart reviews captured preliminary clinical outcomes.

Results

Fifty of 69 patients (72%) invited by primary care providers participated in the Humanwide pilot. We performed chart reviews for the 50 participating patients. Participants were diverse overall (50% non-white, 66% female). Over half of the participants were obese and 58% had one or more major cardiovascular risk factor: dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes. Reach/penetration of Humanwide components varied: pharmacogenomics testing 94%, health coaching 80%, genetic testing 72%, and digital health 64%. Interview participants (n=27) included patients (n=16), providers (n=9), and the 2 staff who were allocated dedicated time for Humanwide patient intake and orientation. Patients and providers reported Humanwide was acceptable; it engaged patients holistically, supported faster medication titration, and strengthened patient-provider relationships. All patients benefited clinically from at least one Humanwide component. Feasibility challenges included: low provider self-efficacy for interpreting genetics and pharmacogenomics; difficulties with data integration; patient technology challenges; and additional staffing needs. Patient financial burden concerns surfaced with respect to sustainability.

Conclusion

This is the first report of implementation of a multi-component precision health model embedded in team-based primary care. We found acceptance from both patients and providers; however, feasibility barriers must be overcome to enable broad spread and sustainability. We found that barriers to implementation of precision health in a team-based primary care clinic are mundane and straightforward, though not necessarily easy to overcome. Future implementation endeavors should invest in basics: education, workflow, and reflection/evaluation. Strengthening fundamentals will enable healthcare systems to more nimbly accept the responsibility of meeting patients at the crossroads of innovative science and routinized clinical systems.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01373-4.

Communicating unexpected pharmacogenomic results to biobank contributors: A focus group study

OBJECTIVES

The goals of this study were to explore 1) the impact of returning unexpected pharmacogenomic (PGx) results to biobank contributors, and 2) participant views about improving communication.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative focus group study with biobank participants (N = 54) who were notified by mail of an individual research result indicating increased risk for adverse events associated with the common cancer drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). We employed a framework approach for analysis.

RESULTS

Our results revealed three themes illustrating participants' questions and uncertainty, especially regarding how to share results with health providers and family members, and remember them over time. Participants valued results for themselves and others, and for the future of medicine. Risk perception was framed by health identity. "Toxicity narratives," or familiarity with another's adverse reaction to chemotherapy, increased the sense of importance participants reported.

CONCLUSION

These focus group results highlight research participant remaining questions and high valuation of PGx results, even when unexpected.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

We identify PGx research participants' needs for clear clinical translation messaging that attends to health identity, pragmatics of sharing information with family members, and patient perceptions of barriers to transferring research results to a clinical context.

Genetic Counseling, Personalized Medicine, and Precision Health

Millions of individuals in the United States will have their exomes and genomes sequenced over the next 5 years as the use of genomic sequencing technologies in clinical care grows and as initiatives in personalized medicine and precision health move forward. As a result, we will see a shift away from the patient population of early adopters who pursued direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing and paid thousands of dollars to get their genomes sequenced and toward a different and more diverse set of test takers. Early data suggest that these individuals will have different motivations for pursuing genomic sequencing and will be less knowledgeable about and less confident of the benefits of genetic testing. To serve this growing population, genetic counselors must understand our future patients as well as the changing landscape of genomic testing, DTC offerings, and population sequencing initiatives.

A stepwise approach to implementing pharmacogenetic testing in the primary care setting

Pharmacogenetic testing can help identify primary care patients at increased risk for medication toxicity, poor response or treatment failure and inform drug therapy. While testing availability is increasing, providers are unprepared to routinely use pharmacogenetic testing for clinical decision-making. Practice-based resources are needed to overcome implementation barriers for pharmacogenetic testing in primary care.The NHGRI's IGNITE I Network (Implementing GeNomics In pracTicE; www.ignite-genomics.org) explored practice models, challenges and implementation barriers for clinical pharmacogenomics. Based on these experiences, we present a stepwise approach pharmacogenetic testing in primary care: patient identification; pharmacogenetic test ordering; interpretation and application of test results, and patient education. We present clinical factors to consider, test-ordering processes and resources, and provide guidance to apply test results and counsel patients. Practice-based resources such as this stepwise approach to clinical decision-making are important resources to equip primary care providers to use pharmacogenetic testing.

Research participants' experiences with return of genetic research results and preferences for web-based alternatives

BACKGROUND

While there is increasing interest in sharing genetic research results with participants, how best to communicate the risks, benefits and limitations of research results remains unclear.

METHODS

Participants who received genetic research results answered open and closed-ended questions about their experiences receiving results and interest in and advantages and disadvantages of a web-based alternative to genetic counseling.

RESULTS

107 BRCA1/2 negative women with a personal or family history of breast cancer consented to receive genetic research results and 82% completed survey items about their experience. Most participants reported there was nothing they disliked (74%) or would change (85%) about their predisclosure or disclosure session (78% and 89%). They most frequently reported liking the genetic counselor and learning new information. Only 24% and 26% would not be willing to complete predisclosure counseling or disclosure of results by a web-based alternative, respectively. The most frequently reported advantages included convenience and reduced time. Disadvantages included not being able to ask questions, the risk of misunderstanding and the impersonal nature of the encounter.

CONCLUSION

Most participants receiving genetic research results report high satisfaction with telephone genetic counseling, but some may be willing to consider self-directed web alternatives for both predisclosure genetic education and return of results.

The impact of raw DNA availability and corresponding online interpretation services: A mixed-methods study

Consumer access to third-party services to interpret raw DNA has raised concerns about downstream healthcare implications. This mixed-methods study set out to examine the extent to which genetic counselors have been contacted by consumers of third-party services and describe counselors' experiences with these "consumer" patients. Counselor views on the quality of information provided to consumers were also examined. Eighty-five genetic counselors completed an online survey, of which 22 completed in-depth telephone interviews. Survey and interview data were analyzed and combined using triangulation techniques. Over half (53%) of the survey respondents indicated they had been contacted by a patient following the use of a third-party raw DNA interpretation service. Among counselors contacted, 72% saw at least one patient. Counselors reported challenges unique to this patient population including overemphasis by patients on the validity of the data and patient resistance to information provided by the counselor. Preparation time burden and counselor inexperience and discomfort counseling these patients were additional challenges. Counselors expressed concern about the quality of the raw data and the clarity and usefulness of interpretation reports. Genetic counselors' experiences with consumer's use of third-party DNA interpretation services provide insight on the opportunities and challenges with the availability of raw DNA directly to consumers. Efforts to better support both consumers and genetic service providers are needed to maximize the effective translation of genome-based knowledge for population health.

Early Outcome Data Assessing Utility of a Post-Test Genomic Counseling Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Precision Health

Information on patients’ preferences is essential to guide the development of more efficient genomic counseling service delivery models. We examined patient preferences in the context of use of a post-test genomic counseling framework on patients (n = 44) with chronic disease receiving online test reports for eight different diseases and one drug-response result. We also explored patients’ disease risk awareness, recall of test report information, and confidence in knowing what to do with their test results. Prior to the post-test genomic counseling session, all participants viewed at least one test report; 81.6% of available test reports were reviewed in total. Participants requested more phone (36) than in-person counseling sessions (8), and phone sessions were shorter (mean 29.1 min; range 12–75 min) than in-person sessions (mean 52.8 min; range 23–85 min). A total of 182 test reports were discussed over the course of 44 counseling sessions (mean 4.13, range 1–9). Thirty-six (81.8%) participants requested assessment for additional medical/family history concerns. In exploring patient experiences of disease risk awareness and recall, no significant differences were identified in comparison to those of participants (n = 199) that had received in-person post-test genomic counseling in a parent study randomized controlled trial (RCT). In summary, a novel post-test genomic counseling framework allowed for a tailored approach to counseling based on the participants’ predetermined choices.

Assessing an Interactive Online Tool to Support Parents' Genomic Testing Decisions

Clinical use of genome-wide sequencing (GWS) requires pre-test genetic counseling, but the availability of genetic counseling is limited. We developed an interactive online decision-support tool, DECIDE, to make genetic counseling, patient education, and decision support more readily available. We performed a non-inferiority trial comparing DECIDE to standard genetic counseling to assess the clinical value of DECIDE for pre-GWS counseling. One hundred and six parents considering GWS for their children with epilepsy were randomized to conventional genetic counseling or DECIDE. Following the intervention, we measured parents' knowledge and empowerment and asked their opinions about using DECIDE. Both DECIDE and conventional genetic counseling significantly increased parents' knowledge, with no difference between groups. Empowerment also increased but by less than 2% in each group. Parents liked using DECIDE and found it useful; 81% would recommend it to others; 49% wished to use it along with a genetic counselor; 26% of parents preferred to see a genetic counselor; 7% preferred DECIDE alone; and 18% had no preference. DECIDE appears equivalent to genetic counseling at conveying information. In addition, it was highly acceptable to the majority of study participants, many of whom indicated that it was useful to their decision-making. Use of DECIDE as a pre-test tool may extend genetic counseling resources.

Operationalizing the Reciprocal Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice: a Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Genomic Counseling and Testing

With the advent of widespread genomic testing for diagnostic indications and disease risk assessment, there is increased need to optimize genetic counseling services to support the scalable delivery of precision medicine. Here, we describe how we operationalized the reciprocal engagement model of genetic counseling practice to develop a framework of counseling components and strategies for the delivery of genomic results. This framework was constructed based upon qualitative research with patients receiving genomic counseling following online receipt of potentially actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomics reports. Consultation with a transdisciplinary group of investigators, including practicing genetic counselors, was sought to ensure broad scope and applicability of these strategies for use with any large-scale genomic testing effort. We preserve the provision of pre-test education and informed consent as established in Mendelian/single-gene disease genetic counseling practice. Following receipt of genomic results, patients are afforded the opportunity to tailor the counseling agenda by selecting the specific test results they wish to discuss, specifying questions for discussion, and indicating their preference for counseling modality. The genetic counselor uses these patient preferences to set the genomic counseling session and to personalize result communication and risk reduction recommendations. Tailored visual aids and result summary reports divide areas of risk (genetic variant, family history, lifestyle) for each disease to facilitate discussion of multiple disease risks. Post-counseling, session summary reports are actively routed to both the patient and their physician team to encourage review and follow-up. Given the breadth of genomic information potentially resulting from genomic testing, this framework is put forth as a starting point to meet the need for scalable genetic counseling services in the delivery of precision medicine.

Clinician-Stakeholders' Perspectives on Using Patient Portals to Return Lynch Syndrome Screening Results

Test results for genetic conditions, such as Lynch Syndrome (LS), have traditionally been returned by genetic counselors or other providers who can explain results implications and provide psychosocial support. Returning genetic results through an Electronic Health Record's patient portal may increase the efficiency of returning results and could activate patient follow-up; however, stakeholder input is necessary to determine acceptability and appropriate implementation for LS. Twenty interviews were conducted with clinicians from six specialties involved in LS screening that represent a range of settings. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis and thematic analysis across content categories. Participants felt that patient portals could supplement personal calls, but the potential sensitive nature of LS screening results indicated the need for caution. Others felt that LS results could be returned through portals if there were clear explanations of the result, reputable additional information available within the portal, urging follow up confirmatory testing, and a referral to a genetics specialist. Patient portals were seen as helpful for prompting patient follow-up and providing resources to notify at-risk family members. There is potential for patient portals to return LS screening and other genetic results, however we raise several issues to resolve before implementation is warranted.