Attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer risk after genetic counseling and decision support: a qualitative comparison between hereditary cancer types

Genetic testing in adult survivors of retinoblastoma in Denmark: A study of the experience and impact of genetic testing many years after initial diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Survivors with heritable retinoblastoma (RB) face a high risk for second primary cancer and RB in their children. Knowledge of heredity can support second cancer surveillance, convey reproductive options or early diagnosis of RB in their offspring. Currently, all newly diagnosed Danish patients with RB are offered genetic testing, as opposed to a minority of survivors diagnosed before available DNA testing.

OBJECTIVE

To examine RB survivors' response to unsolicited contact, uptake of genetic testing, and RB1 variant detection rate, and to qualitatively evaluate the experience and overall impact of genetic testing for heritable RB.

METHODS

Genetically untested adult RB survivors were invited to receive genetic counseling, undergo genetic testing for heritable RB and complete an eye examination. The number of responses, uptake of genetic testing and genetic results are descriptively reported. Additionally, responding survivors participated in a qualitative interview study of the perceived impact of genetic testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Among invited RB survivors, 58% responded. Of these, 88% opted for genetic counseling and genetic testing. A diagnosis of heritable RB was established in 23% of RB survivors. Interestingly, all of these survivors were unilaterally affected. Analysis of data from the interviews revealed three recurring themes regarding the impact of genetic counseling and testing several years after initial diagnosis: 'Risk of what?', 'Knowledge is important' and 'Impact of the result'. The possible risk ofsecond cancer and RB in their children was new knowledge for several participants; however, in general, the participants appreciated receiving genetic information and certainty about heredity. Accordingly, the impact of genetic counseling and testing was perceived in a positive way.

CONCLUSION

Overall, RB survivors valued the opportunity to receive genetic counseling and undergo genetic testing many years after diagnosis. Responding RB survivors appreciated the invitation to test, felt well-informed and described little decisional conflict regarding their decision-making, valuing the genetic information and certainty. Heritable RB was confirmed in 23% of the previously untested RB survivors. These individuals emphasized the value of knowing and being proactive regarding both reproduction and cancer risk.

"A Gift to My Family for Their Future": Attitudes about Genetic Research Participation

BACKGROUND

Broad participation in genetic research is needed to promote equitable advances in disease treatment and prevention.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to assess motivations for, and concerns about, genetic research participation.

METHODS

The Genetics in Research and Health Care Survey was sent in winter 2017-2018 to 57,331 adult Kaiser Permanente (KP) members from 7 US regions to assess attitudes about genetic testing in health care and research. The survey included an open-ended question on why members would or would not participate in genetic research. Open text responses to this question were coded in the qualitative analysis software Dedoose and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Code summaries were organized by major themes, subthemes, and exemplary quotes.

RESULTS

Of the 10,369 participants who completed the survey, 2,645 (25%) provided a comment describing reasons they would or would not participate in research involving genetic testing. Respondents who provided a text comment were 64% female, 49% non-Hispanic (NH) White, 17% Asian/Pacific Islander, 20% Hispanic, and 14% NH Black. The primary themes identified were (1) altruism; (2) decision-making and planning; (3) data use; and (4) data security. These major themes were consistent across each race and ethnic group.

CONCLUSIONS

To promote broad participation in genetic research, it is important that recruitment materials address the primary motivators for genetic research participation, including altruism and the potential use of results for personal decision-making. Study materials should also address concerns about possible misuse of genetic information and fears over potential data breaches.

What would I do? Perspectives on the factors underlying Lynch syndrome genetic testing and results sharing decisions for high-risk colorectal cancer patients

Objective

Universal tumour testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in all incident colorectal cancers (CRCs) and sequential diagnostic genetic testing is cost‐effective in Australia. Because of this, our study aimed to understand factors underlying possible decisions faced by tumour test‐positive CRC patients and their at‐risk relatives throughout the LS diagnosis pathway.

Methods

Semi‐structured telephone interviews were conducted with 23 participants, using four hypothetical scenarios. Vignette‐guided closed‐ and open‐ended questions asked about LS genetic testing uptake, discussing diagnosis with at‐risk relatives, and risk‐reducing interventions. Personal perspectives on genetic testing were collected pre‐post vignette discussion. Inductive thematic analysis was performed on open‐ended questions. Decisional pathway diagrams were developed to convey factors influencing complex decision‐making processes.

Results

Participant responses incorporated unfolding scenario information, resulting in three decision themes: (1) wanting to know one's LS status; (2) informing family about LS; (3) navigating risk‐reducing interventions. Across all themes, ‘knowledge’ emerged as a facilitator, and ‘negative emotional experience’ as a barrier. Personal supportive views toward genetic testing increased post‐interview.

Conclusions

When communicating with tumour test‐positive CRC patients or their relatives about LS genetic testing, providing guidance/resources to inform decisions around risk‐reducing interventions and informing family members is critical. Scenario‐driven interviews provide insight into what individuals might do when facing complex healthcare decisions and could aid informed decision‐making. This approach may be applicable in other conditions, particularly with mainstreaming being increasingly introduced into the genetic context.

Uptake of polygenic risk information among women at increased risk of breast cancer

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are increasingly being implemented to assess breast cancer risk. This study aimed to assess and determine factors associated with uptake of PRS among women at increased risk of breast cancer for whom genetic testing to date had been uninformative. Participants were recruited from the Variants in Practice study from which breast cancer PRS had been calculated. Four hundred women were notified by letter of the availability of their PRS and invited to complete a self-administered survey comprising several validated scales. Considering non-participants, uptake of PRS was between 61.8% and 42.1%. Multivariate logistic regression identified that women were more likely to receive their PRS if they reported greater benefits (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, P = .011) and fewer barriers to receiving their PRS (OR = 0.80, P = .007), had completed higher level education (OR = 3.32, P = .004), and did not have daughters (0.29, P = .006). Uptake of breast cancer PRS varied according to several testing- and patient-related factors. Knowledge of these factors will facilitate the implementation of polygenic testing in clinical practice and support informed decision making by patients.

Patient perspectives on molecular tumor profiling: "Why wouldn't you?"

Aim

This study explored the attitudes of patients with advanced cancer towards MTP and return of results, prior to undergoing genomic testing within a research program.

Methods

Participants were recruited as part of the longitudinal PiGeOn (Psychosocial Issues in Genomics in Oncology) study involving patients with advanced/metastatic solid cancer who had exhausted therapeutic options and who were offered MTP in order to identify cognate therapies. Twenty patients, selected by purposive sampling, were interviewed around the time they gave consent to MTP. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Themes identified in the transcripts were cross-validated via qualitative responses to the PiGeOn study survey (n = 569; 63%).

Results

All interviewed participants gave consent to MTP without reservation. Three themes were identified and further supported via the survey responses: (1) Obvious agreement to participate, primarily because of desire for new treatments and altruism. (2) The black box – while participant knowledge of genomics was generally poor, faith in their oncologists and the scientific process encouraged them to proceed with testing; and (3) Survival is the priority – receiving treatment to prolong life was the priority for all participants, and other issues such as identification of a germline variant were generally seen as ancillary.

Conclusion

Having advanced cancer seemed to abrogate any potential concerns about MTP. Participants valued the research for varied reasons, but this was secondary to their priority to survive. While no negative attitudes toward MTP emerged, limitations in understanding of genomics were evident.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5920-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Knowledge, attitudes and referral patterns of lynch syndrome: a survey of clinicians in australia

This study assessed Australian clinicians’ knowledge, attitudes and referral patterns of patients with suspected Lynch syndrome for genetic services. A total of 144 oncologists, surgeons, gynaecologists, general practitioners and gastroenterologists from the Australian Medical Association and Clinical Oncology Society responded to a web-based survey. Most respondents demonstrated suboptimal knowledge of Lynch syndrome. Male general practitioners who have been practicing for ≥10 years were less likely to offer genetic referral than specialists, and many clinicians did not recognize that immunohistochemistry testing is not a germline test. Half of all general practitioners did not actually refer patients in the past 12 months, and 30% of them did not feel that their role is to identify patients for genetic referral. The majority of clinicians considered everyone to be responsible for making the initial referral to genetic services, but a small preference was given to oncologists (15%) and general practitioners (13%). Patient information brochures, continuing genetic education programs and referral guidelines were favoured as support for practice. Targeted education interventions should be considered to improve referral. An online family history assessment tool with built-in decision support would be helpful in triaging high-risk individuals for pathology analysis and/or genetic assessment in general practice.

Public attitudes towards genomic risk profiling as a component of routine population screening

Including low penetrance genomic variants in population-based screening might enable personalization of screening intensity and follow up. The application of genomics in this way requires formal evaluation. Even if clinically beneficial, uptake would still depend on the attitudes of target populations. We developed a deliberative workshop on two hypothetical applications (in colorectal cancer and newborn screening) in which we applied stepped, neutrally-framed, information sets. Data were collected using nonparticipant observation, free-text comments by individual participants, and a structured survey. Qualitative data were transcribed and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Eight workshops were conducted with 170 individuals (120 colorectal cancer screening and 50 newborn screening for type 1 diabetes). The use of information sets promoted informed deliberation. In both contexts, attitudes appeared to be heavily informed by assessments of the likely validity of the test results and its personal and health care utility. Perceived benefits included the potential for early intervention, prevention, and closer monitoring while concerns related to costs, education needs regarding the probabilistic nature of risk, the potential for worry, and control of access to personal genomic information. Differences between the colorectal cancer and newborn screening groups appeared to reflect different assessments of potential personal utility, particularly regarding prevention.

Distress and psychosocial needs of a heterogeneous high risk familial cancer population

In order to assess the levels of distress and psychosocial support needs of a high risk population, we undertook a study to look at both the objective and subjective levels of distress and the wants and needs of individuals from a high familial cancer risk population. Three hundred and eighteen individuals (160 affected, 158 unaffected) completed several distress and psychosocial needs questionnaires (including the Brief Symptom Inventory-18). Sixty key informants were also surveyed about their perspective on the support needs of this population. In the largely female (90%), largely HBOC syndrome group (approximately 90%), 20% had significant levels of generalized distress, with no significant differences between affected and unaffected individuals. Generalized distress was also not significantly different as a function of mutation status. Individuals who received inconclusive test results, however, were more likely to indicate somatic symptoms of distress. Those individuals who did not have social support were more likely to be those who had never had cancer and who either had a mutation, received inconclusive test results, or were not tested. Key informants were most likely to indicate that patients need more support. These results provide evidence for the importance of establishing regular psychosocial distress screening, including a focus on somatic symptoms, in such high risk populations.

"For all my family's sake, I should go and find out": an Australian report on genetic counseling and testing uptake in individuals at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer

CONTEXT

Despite proven benefits, the uptake of genetic counseling and testing by at-risk family members of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers remains low.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine at-risk individuals' reported reasons for and against familial cancer clinic (FCC) attendance and genetic testing.

METHODS

Thirty-nine telephone interviews were conducted with relatives of high-risk mutation carriers, 23% (n = 9) of whom had not previously attended an FCC. Interview responses were analyzed using the frameworks of Miles and Huberman.

RESULTS

The reasons most commonly reported for FCC attendance were for clarification of risk status and to gain access to testing. While disinterest in testing was one reason for FCC nonattendance, several individuals were unaware of their risk (n = 3) or their eligibility to attend an FCC (n = 2), despite being notified of their risk status through their participation in a large-scale research project. Individuals' reasons for undergoing testing were in line with that reported elsewhere; however, concerns about discrimination and insurance were not reported in nontestees.

CONCLUSIONS

Current guidelines regarding notifying individuals discovered to be at increased risk in a research, rather than clinical setting, take a largely nondirective approach. However, this study demonstrates that individuals who receive a single letter notifying them of their risk may not understand/value the information they receive.