The impact of communicating uncertain test results in cancer genetic counseling: A systematic mixed studies review

Information needs persist after genetic counseling and testing for BRCA1/2 and Lynch Syndrome

PURPOSE

Research has shown that cancer genetic risk is often not well understood by patients undergoing genetic testing and counseling. We describe the barriers to understanding genetic risk and the needs of high-risk persons and cancer survivors who have undergone genetic testing.

METHODS

Using data from an internet survey of adults living in the USA who responded 'yes' to having ever had a genetic test to determine cancer risk (N = 696), we conducted bivariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate associations between demographic, clinical, and communication-related variables by our key outcome of having vs. not having enough information about genetics and cancer to speak with family. Percentages for yes and no responses to queries about unmet informational needs were calculated. Patient satisfaction with counseling and percentage disclosure of genetic risk status to family were also calculated.

RESULTS

We found that a lack of resources provided by provider to inform family members and a lack of materials provided along with genetic test results were strongly associated with not having enough information about genetics and cancer (OR 4.54 95% CI 2.40-8.59 and OR 2.19 95% CI 1.16-4.14 respectively). Among participants undergoing genetic counseling, almost half reported needing more information on what genetic risk means for them and their family and how genetic testing results might impact future screening.

CONCLUSION

High levels of satisfaction with genetic counseling may not give a full picture of the patient-provider interaction and may miss potential unmet needs of the patient. Accessible resources and ongoing opportunities for updating family history information could reinforce knowledge about genetic risk.

Cancer patients' experience of receiving variant of uncertain significance results: An Asian perspective

Due to a lack of ancestry-matched, functional, and segregation data, Asians have a higher rate of receiving a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) result following panel testing. Managing VUS results presents challenges, as it often leads to increased anxiety and distress among cancer patients undergoing genetic testing. This exploratory study aims to investigate the experience of Asian cancer patients upon receiving a VUS result. A qualitative, semi-structured interview study was conducted, involving cancer patients who had received a VUS result through the Cancer Genetics Service of the National Cancer Centre Singapore. Twenty participants were interviewed, and their responses were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes. Thematic analysis revealed five major themes: (1) VUS results are interpreted as uncertain outcomes; (2) a VUS result provides relief and prompts positive behavioral adjustments; (3) patients employ fatalism and religion as coping mechanisms to navigate uncertainty; (4) genetic counselors, family, and the community offer reassurance and support; (5) patients value updates on variant classifications for future management. While this novel study provides unique insights into the perspectives of Asian patients who receive VUS results, it also highlights patients' effective management of VUS results and uncertainty, which has implications for improving counseling practices in Asia. Emphasis must be placed on accurate interpretation and clear communication of VUS results to dispel the possibility of misconceptions, misdiagnosis, and mismanagement in cancer care.

Psychological distress following multi-gene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

Advances in our understanding of the genetic landscape of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have led to the clinical adoption of multi-gene panel testing. Panel testing introduces new sources of genetic uncertainty secondary to the inclusion of moderate- and low-penetrance genes, as well as the increased likelihood of identifying a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). This cross-sectional study explored the post-test psychological functioning of women who underwent multi-gene panel testing for HBOC susceptibility genes. Two hundred and ninety-five women who underwent panel testing within the previous 2 years completed a study questionnaire to measure levels of cancer-related and genetic testing-related distress using the Impact of Events Scale (IES) and the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA), respectively. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the relationship between genetic test results and levels of psychological distress captured by the IES and MICRA. In this cohort, a pathogenic variant (PV) was identified in 41 (14%) of participants, and 77 (26%) participants were found to have a VUS. In the multi-variate model, higher mean levels of genetic testing-related distress were observed in individuals with a PV (p < 0.001) or a VUS (p = 0.007) compared to those with a negative result. Furthermore, participants with a PV in a moderate-penetrance gene were found to have higher levels of genetic testing-related distress compared to those with a PV in a high-risk gene (p = 0.03). Overall, participants were highly satisfied with their genetic testing experience, with 92% of individuals reporting they would recommend testing to others. Our findings highlight differences in psychological outcomes based on both variant pathogenicity and gene penetrance, which contribute to our understanding of the impact of panel testing and sources of both cancer-related and genetic testing-related distress secondary to testing.

The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes

A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) is a difference in the DNA sequence with uncertain consequences for gene function. A VUS in a hereditary cancer gene should not change medical care, yet some patients undergo medical procedures based on their VUS result, highlighting the unmet educational needs among patients and healthcare providers. To address this need, we developed, evaluated, and refined novel educational materials to explain that while VUS results do not change medical care, it remains important to share any personal or family history of cancer with family members given that their personal and family medical history can guide their cancer risk management. We began by reviewing the prior literature and transcripts from interviews with six individuals with a VUS result to identify content and design considerations to incorporate into educational materials. We then gathered feedback to improve materials via a focus group of multidisciplinary experts and multiple rounds of semi-structured interviews with individuals with a VUS result. Themes for how to improve content, visuals, and usefulness were used to refine the materials. In the final round of interviews with an additional 10 individuals with a VUS result, materials were described as relatable, useful, factual, and easy to navigate, and also increased their understanding of cancer gene VUS results.

Women's Metaphors About BRCA Gene Testing and How They Can Inform Health Communication Theory and Practice

Genetic testing can detect whether an individual carries a harmful variant in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 (Breast Cancer 1 or 2) gene which, if present, drastically increases a woman's risk for breast and ovarian cancer. The experience of BRCA gene testing can be an emotionally laden process yielding significant uncertainty. In this study, we examined women's experiences of BRCA gene testing by exploring how participants communicatively framed and made sense of this process through the use of metaphors. Comparing uncertain and unfamiliar experiences to familiar references through metaphor can help people in challenging health-related situations with sense-making and communicating complex emotions. Furthermore, metaphors can be employed as a therapeutic tool by health care professionals, but their use has not often been studied regarding experiences of genetic testing, including BRCA gene testing. We conducted in-depth interviews with 42 women who have undergone BRCA gene testing (regardless of results), and analyzed data using constant comparative techniques. Eight categories of metaphors that women used surrounding BRCA gene testing were evident in the data, including those related to (a) knowledge is power; (b) gambling; (c) a journey; (d) a rollercoaster; (e) battle, disaster, or wreckage; (f) Pandora's box or a can of worms; (g) doom and gloom; and (h) the release or placing of a weight. Results enhance our understanding of women's experiences related to the uncertainty-inducing process of BRCA gene testing and lead to valuable theoretical implications and practical recommendations, including regarding the potential use of metaphors in patient-provider communication about BRCA genetic risk.

"We are just not sure what that means or if it's relevant": Uncertainty when gathering family history information in South African prenatal genetic counseling consultations

Uncertainty impacts the process of health communication. The management and tolerance of uncertainty during healthcare discussions have gained renewed focus due to the growing challenge of obtaining and delivering complex health information, and the offer of health services in diverse contexts. Prenatal genetic counseling (GC) provides education, support and testing options for patients and couples facing a genetic or congenital diagnosis or risk during pregnancy. Gathering detailed and accurate family history information is essential to determine a patient's genetic risk. In South Africa, contextual factors such as patient literacy, language diversity, limited written patient health records, and a lack of familiarity with GC services may increase the potential for misunderstandings during GC consultations. This study uses a qualitative sociolinguistic approach to analyse 9 video-recorded South African prenatal GC consultations to understand the impact of uncertainty on the process of gathering family history information. The findings reveal uncertainty is introduced in different ways during family history taking. This includes when patients have no knowledge about their family history; when they have some knowledge but the details are unclear; or when patients have knowledge but the details are confusing. Uncertainty can lead to interactional trouble in the form of knowledge asymmetries, interrogative questioning, reversals in epistemic authority, and the potential for mistrust. Suggestions are made for how genetic specialists can manage uncertainty in GC family history taking. These include recognizing contextual sources of uncertainty, understanding how patients may respond to uncertainty and being aware of personal responses to moments of discomfort. Specific communication training recommendations and video-based sociolinguistic methods to enhance reflection and communication practice are highlighted. These approaches may enhance the effectiveness of GC communication and strengthen patient-specialist relationships, especially in diverse settings.

Genomics in Egypt: Current Status and Future Aspects

Egypt is the third most densely inhabited African country. Due to the economic burden and healthcare costs of overpopulation, genomic and genetic testing is a huge challenge. However, in the era of precision medicine, Egypt is taking a shift in approach from “one-size-fits all” to more personalized healthcare via advancing the practice of medical genetics and genomics across the country. This shift necessitates concrete knowledge of the Egyptian genome and related diseases to direct effective preventive, diagnostic and counseling services of prevalent genetic diseases in Egypt. Understanding disease molecular mechanisms will enhance the capacity for personalized interventions. From this perspective, we highlight research efforts and available services for rare genetic diseases, communicable diseases including the coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID19), and cancer. The current state of genetic services in Egypt including availability and access to genetic services is described. Drivers for applying genomics in Egypt are illustrated with a SWOT analysis of the current genetic/genomic services. Barriers to genetic service development in Egypt, whether economic, geographic, cultural or educational are discussed as well. The sensitive topic of communicating genomic results and its ethical considerations is also tackled. To understand disease pathogenesis, much can be gained through the advancement and integration of genomic technologies via clinical applications and research efforts in Egypt. Three main pillars of multidisciplinary collaboration for advancing genomics in Egypt are envisaged: resources, infrastructure and training. Finally, we highlight the recent national plan to establish a genome center that will aim to prepare a map of the Egyptian human genome to discover and accurately determine the genetic characteristics of various diseases. The Reference Genome Project for Egyptians and Ancient Egyptians will initialize a new genomics era in Egypt. We propose a multidisciplinary governance system in Egypt to support genomic medicine research efforts and integrate into the healthcare system whilst ensuring ethical conduct of data.

Making BRCA1 genetic test reports easier to understand through user-centered design: A randomized trial

PURPOSE

Our objective was to apply a user-centered design process to identify phrases, graphics, and ways of communicating numerical risks that could be used to help patients understand their cancer risk and next steps on receiving BRCA1 genetic test results (positive, negative, and variants of uncertain significance).

METHODS

The first phase of the study, a user-centered design process, consisted of 4 rounds of interviews (N = 42, including 13 health care professionals and 16 patients having undergone BRCA testing). The second was a randomized, between-participants experimental study of 456 United Kingdom residents that compared the resulting reports to reports used in a United Kingdom national genomic laboratory hub. Outcomes were subjective and objective comprehension, communication efficacy, actionability, and perceived risk.

RESULTS

Subjective comprehension, communication efficacy, and actionability were all higher for the user-centered reports, with no difference in perceived risk. Comprehension of participants viewing user-centered reports was significantly better on 2 items, directionally (but not significantly) better on 6 items, and directionally (but not significantly) worse on 2 items.

CONCLUSION

Our results imply that user-centered design is a promising approach for developing materials about complex genetic risks. We suggest wordings that are likely to lead to improved comprehension when communicating BRCA-associated risks.

"Left in limbo": Exploring how patients with colorectal cancer interpret and respond to a suspected Lynch syndrome diagnosis

Background

A diagnosis of suspected Lynch syndrome (SLS) is given when a tumour displays characteristics consistent with Lynch syndrome (LS), but no germline pathogenic variant is identified. This inconclusive diagnosis results in uncertainty around appropriate cancer risk management. This qualitative study explored how patients with CRC interpret and respond to an SLS diagnosis.

Methods

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 15 patients with CRC who received an SLS diagnosis, recruited from cancer genetics services across Australia. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Participant responses were compared with appointment summary letters from cancer genetics services.

Results

Participants’ interpretations of genetic test results were found to vary widely. While this variation often aligned with variation in interpretations by cancer genetics services, participants also had difficulties with the complexity and recall of genetic test results. Participants had a range of psychological responses to the uncertainty that their results presented, from relief to disappointment and doubt. Cancer risk perceptions also varied widely, with participants’ interpretations of their genetic test results just one of several influencing factors. Despite this variability, almost all participants adhered to cancer risk management advice, although different participants received different advice. All participants also communicated any cancer risk management advice to first-degree relatives, motivated by protecting them, but information communicated was not always consistent with advice received.

Conclusions

Our study findings highlight the variability in patients’ interpretations of their diagnosis, cancer risk management and family communication when a diagnosis of SLS is received, and provide novel insights into how healthcare professionals can better support patients with SLS.

Clinical management among individuals with variant of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Improper medical use of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) remains a concern in hereditary cancer genetic testing. The goal of this study was to assess the association between pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP), VUS, and benign and likely benign (B/LB) genetic test results and cancer-related surgical and screening management. Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO were conducted from 1946 to August 26, 2020. Eligible studies included individuals with cancer genetic test result and surgical or screening management outcomes. We reviewed 885 abstracts and 22 studies that reported relevant surgical and screening outcomes were included. Meta-analysis revealed significantly higher surgical rates among individuals with P/LP than among those with VUS for therapeutic mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 7.35, 95% CI, 4.14-13.64), prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 3.05, 95% CI, 1.5-6.19), and oophorectomy (OR = 6.46, 95% CI, 3.64-11.44). There were no significant differences in therapeutic mastectomy, or breast conservation or lumpectomy rates between individuals with P/LP and VUS, or in any outcomes between patients with VUS and B/LB. Studies evaluating screening outcomes were limited, and results were conflicting. Comprehensive analysis do not indicate that a significant number of individuals with VUS results undergo inappropriate clinical management.

Uptake and acceptability of a mainstreaming model of hereditary cancer multigene panel testing among patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer

Purpose:

To address demands for timely germline information to guide treatments, we evaluated experiences of patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer with a mainstreaming genetic testing model wherein multigene panel testing was ordered by oncologists with standardized pre-test patient education, and genetic counselors delivered results and post-test genetic counseling via telephone.

Methods:

Among 1203 eligible patients, we conducted a prospective single-arm study to examine patient uptake and acceptability (via self-report surveys at baseline and three-weeks and three-months following result return) of this mainstreaming model.

Results:

Only 10% of eligible patients declined participation. Among 1054 tested participants, 10% had pathogenic variants (PV), 16% had variants of uncertain significance (VUS), and 74% had no variant identified (NV). Participants reported high initial acceptability, including high satisfaction with their testing decision. Variability over time in several outcomes existed for participants with PV or NV: Those with NV experienced a temporary increase in depression (p_Time<0.001; p_Time2<0.001), and those with PV experienced a small increase in genetic testing distress (p=0.03). Findings suggested that result type, sex, and cancer type were also associated with outcomes including clinical depression and uncertainty.

Conclusion:

This mainstreaming model may offer a feasible approach for extending access to germline genetic information.

How patients deal with an ambiguous medical test: Decision-making after genetic testing

OBJECTIVE

We know little about how patients make decisions when they receive a variant of uncertain significance result (VUS) from genetic testing. The purpose of this study was to elucidate a model of patient-informed decision-making after receiving a VUS result.

METHODS

Using an adapted Mental Models Approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with women who received a VUS result from genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer (N = 20) to explore factors they believed were relevant to their decision-making. Two coders used a coding scheme informed by experts in hereditary breast cancer to conduct analysis. Inter-coder reliability was α = .86.

RESULTS

Three overarching decision themes emerged from the interviews: managing ambiguity, medical risk management, and sharing results with others. While participants noted some difficulty understanding their result, genetic counselors' interpretations, psychosocial factors (e.g., risk perceptions), and competing extrinsic demands influenced their decisions.

CONCLUSION

Complex influences affect patient decision-making after a VUS result from genetic testing and may encourage health protective behavior.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Even patients who understand their test result could use support managing the ambiguity of their test result and sharing it with others.

Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice, May 2021

An extensive review of new resources to support the provision of evidence-based care for women and infants. The current column includes a discussion of the prenatal prediction of fetal macrosomia and commentaries on reviews focused on the effects of date palm and dill seed on labor outcomes and the current research available on SARS-CoV-2 and pregnancy outcomes.

Adaptation of the working alliance inventory for the assessment of the therapeutic alliance in genetic counseling

The concept of therapeutic alliance is central to genetic counseling as the mechanism through which the outcomes of empowerment and effective coping are likely to be achieved. To date, there have been no published systematic assessments of the therapeutic relationship in genetic counseling. We adapted a previously validated measure of the therapeutic alliance to genetic counseling and assessed its reliability and validity. Participants were enrolled in a clinical genomic study where they were randomized to receive education about carrier results via a Web platform or via a genetic counselor and then further randomized to receive genetic counseling (without additional education) or not. We rated the therapeutic alliance from audio recordings of 120 genetic counseling sessions. We modified the observer version of the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI-O), initially designed to assess therapeutic relationships in psychotherapy. We examined internal consistency reliability by calculating Cronbach's alpha and inter-rater reliability through both percent agreement and Gwet's alternative agreement coefficient (AC). Regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship of WAI-O scores with session length and with the designation of the session as one in which prior education was delivered by the genetic counselor or not. The adapted scale had high-reliability characteristics with agreement of 88%-93%, Gwet's AC of 0.84-0.90, and Cronbach's alpha of 0.89-0.93 for the three WAI-O subscales (bonds, goals, and tasks). Although there was no difference in alliance based on whether prior education was provided by the genetic counselor, the total WAI-O score significantly increased with increasing session length (beta =0.667, p<.001), providing preliminary evidence of construct validity. The WAI-O that we have adapted can be used reliably with two independent raters to assess the therapeutic alliance in studies of genetic counseling. The initial evidence for construct validity is promising and should be reassessed in future genetic counseling studies using the WAI-O.