Pre-test genetic counseling services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer delivered by non-genetics professionals in the state of Florida

The UTHealth Houston Adult Cardiovascular Genomics Certificate Program: Efficacy and Impact on Healthcare Professionals

Background

The demand for genetic services has outpaced the availability of resources, challenging clinicians untrained in genetic integration into clinical decision-making. The UTHealth Adult Cardiovascular Genomics Certificate (CGC) program trains non-genetic healthcare professionals to recognize, assess, and refer patients with heritable cardiovascular diseases. This asynchronous online course includes 24 modules in three tiers of increasing complexity, using realistic clinical scenarios, interactive dialogues, quizzes, and tests to reinforce learning. We hypothesized that the CGC will increase genomic competencies in this underserved audience and encourage applying genomic concepts in clinical practice.

Methods

Required course evaluations include pre- and post-assessments, knowledge checks in each module, and surveys for module-specific feedback. After 6 months, longitudinal feedback surveys gathered data on the long-term impact of the course on clinical practice and conducted focused interviews with learners.

Results

The CGC was accredited in September 2022. Principal learners were nurses (24%), nurse practitioners (21%), physicians (16%), and physician assistants. Scores of 283 learners in paired pre- and post-assessments increased specific skills related to recognizing heritable diseases, understanding inheritance patterns, and interpreting genetic tests. Interviews highlighted the CGC's modular structure and linked resources as key strengths. Learners endorsed confidence to use genetic information in clinical practice, such as discussing genetic concepts and risks with patients and referring patients for genetic testing. Learners were highly likely to recommend the CGC to colleagues, citing its role in enhancing heritable disease awareness.

Conclusions

The CGC program effectively empowers non-genetic clinicians to master genomic competencies, fostering collaboration to prevent deaths from heritable cardiovascular diseases, and potentially transforming healthcare education and clinical practice.

Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care

PURPOSE

We conducted qualitative interviews with patients with cancer and providers to identify gaps in clinical care and highlight care delivery solutions for the return of secondary germline findings.

METHODS

Twelve patients and 19 cancer providers from the United States were interviewed between January 2019 and May 2021. Interviews elicited feedback about patient information needs, emotional responses to secondary findings, and recommendations for improving pre-test education.

RESULTS

Patients' responses ranged from gratitude to regret, depending on how much pre-test counseling they received before tumor testing. Providers cited insufficient clinic time as a major barrier to pretest education, favoring online support tools and standardized pre-test education models. Providers had differing perspectives on how pre-test education should be integrated into clinical workflows but agreed that it should include the differences between somatic and germline testing, the likelihood of medically actionable findings, and the possibility of being referred to a genetics provider.

CONCLUSION

The spectrum of participants' responses to their secondary findings underscores the importance of adequate pre-test discussions before somatic sequencing. Although educational interventions could address patients' information needs and augment traditional pre-test counseling, health care systems, labs, and genetic providers may be called on to play greater roles in pre-test education.

Combining clinical and molecular characterization of CDH1: a multidisciplinary approach to reclassification of a splicing variant

Pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in the CDH1 gene are associated with diffuse gastric and lobular breast cancer syndrome (DGLBC) and can increase the lifetime risk for both diffuse gastric cancer and lobular breast cancer. Given the risk for diffuse gastric cancer among individuals with CDH1 PGVs is up to 30-40%, prophylactic total gastrectomy is often recommended to affected individuals. Therefore, accurate interpretation of CDH1 variants is of the utmost importance for proper clinical decision-making. Herein we present a 45-year-old female, with lobular breast cancer and a father with gastric cancer of unknown pathology at age 48, who was identified to have an intronic variant of uncertain significance in the CDH1 gene, specifically c.833-9 C > G. Although the proband did not meet the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) criteria for gastric surveillance, she elected to pursue an upper endoscopy where non-targeted gastric biopsies identified a focus of signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC). The proband then underwent a total gastrectomy, revealing numerous SRCC foci, but no invasive diffuse gastric cancer. Simultaneously, a genetic testing laboratory performed RNA sequencing to further analyze the CDH1 intronic variant, identifying an abnormal transcript from a novel acceptor splice site. The RNA analysis in conjunction with the patient's gastric foci of SRCC and family history was sufficient evidence for reclassification of the variant from uncertain significance to likely pathogenic. In conclusion, we report the first case of the CDH1 c.833-9 C > G intronic variant being associated with DGLBC and illustrate how collaboration among clinicians, laboratory personnel, and patients is crucial for variant resolution.

Exploring Stakeholders' Perspectives on Implementing Universal Germline Testing for Colorectal Cancer: Findings From a Clinical Practice Survey

PURPOSE

New guidelines recommend considering germline genetic testing for all patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is a lack of data on stakeholders' perspectives on the advantages and barriers of implementing universal germline testing (UGT). This study assessed the perspectives of members of the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer (CGA-IGC) regarding the implementation of UGT for patients with CRC, including readiness, logistics, and barriers.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was sent to 317 active members of CGA-IGC. The survey included sections on demographics, clinical practice specialty, established institutional practices for testing, and questions pertaining to support of and barriers to implementing UGT for patients with CRC.

RESULTS

Eighty CGA-IGC members (25%) participated, including 42 genetic counselors (53%) and 14 gastroenterologists (18%). Forty-seven (59%) reported an academic medical center as their primary work setting, and most participants (56%) had more than 10 years of clinical practice. Although most participants (73%) supported UGT, 54% indicated that changes in practice would be required before adopting UGT, and 39% indicated that these changes would be challenging to implement. There was support for both genetics and nongenetics providers to order genetic testing, and a majority (57%) supported a standardized multigene panel rather than a customized gene panel. Key barriers to UGT implementation included limited genetics knowledge among nongenetics providers, time-consuming processes for obtaining consent, ordering tests, disclosing results, and lack of insurance coverage.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates wide support among hereditary GI cancer experts for implementation of UGT for patients with CRC. However, alternative service delivery models using nongenetics providers should be considered to address the logistical barriers to UGT implementation, particularly the growing demand for genetic testing.

Critical components of genomic medicine practice for non-genetics healthcare professionals: Genetic counselors' perspectives and implications for medical education

Genetic services are increasingly provided by non-genetics healthcare professionals (NGHPs) with minimal formal training in genetics/genomics. Research demonstrates gaps in knowledge and clinical practices in genetics/genomics among NGHPs, but there is a lack of consensus on the specific knowledge needed by NGHPs to effectively provide genetic services. As clinical genetics professionals, genetic counselors (GCs) have insight into the critical components of genetics/genomics knowledge and practices needed by NGHPs. This study explored GCs' beliefs regarding whether NGHPs should provide genetic services and identified GCs' perceptions of the components of knowledge and clinical practice in genetics/genomics that are most critical for NGHPs providing genetic services. Two hundred and forty GCs completed an online quantitative survey with 17 participating in a follow-up qualitative interview. Descriptive statistics and cross-comparisons were generated for survey data. Interview data were analyzed using an inductive qualitative method for cross-case analysis. Most GCs disagreed with NGHPs providing genetic services, but beliefs varied widely, ranging from disagreement due to perceived gaps in knowledge or clinical skills to acceptance of NGHPs providing genetic services due to limited access to genetics professionals. Across survey and interview data, GCs endorsed the interpretation of genetic test results, understanding implications of results, collaboration with genetics professionals, knowledge of the risks and benefits to testing, and recognizing indications for genetic testing as critical components of knowledge and clinical practice for NGHPs. Several recommendations for improving the provision of genetic services were provided by respondents including educating NGHPs to provide genetic services through case-based continuing medical education and increasing collaboration between NGHPs and genetics professionals. As GCs are healthcare providers with experience and vested interests in educating NGHPs, their perspectives can help inform the creation of continuing medical education to ensure patients' access to high-quality genomic medicine care from providers of varying backgrounds.

Missed diagnosis or misdiagnosis: Common pitfalls in genetic testing

Genetic testing has the power to identify individuals with increased predisposition to disease, allowing individuals the opportunity to make informed management, treatment and reproductive decisions. As genomic medicine continues to be integrated into aspects of everyday patient care and the indications for genetic testing continue to expand, genetic services are increasingly being offered by non-genetic clinicians. The current complexities of genetic testing highlight the need to support and ensure non-genetic professionals are adequately equipped with the knowledge and skills to provide services. We describe a series of misdiagnosed/mismanaged cases, highlighting the common pitfalls in genetic testing to identify the knowledge gaps and where education and support is needed. We highlight that education focusing on differential diagnoses, test selection and result interpretation is needed. Collaboration and communication between genetic and non-genetic clinicians and integration of genetic counsellors into different medical settings are important. This will minimise the risks and maximise the benefits of genetic testing, ensuring adverse outcomes are mitigated.

Integrating hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic counselling and testing into mainstream clinical practice: Legal and ethical challenges

Health professionals not specialized in genetics are expected to take an increasing role in genetic services delivery. This article aims to identify legal and ethical challenges related to a collaborative oncogenetics service model, where non-genetic health professionals provide genetic services to patients. Through a scoping literature review, we identified issues to the provision of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, or other hereditary adult cancers, genetic testing under this model. Concerns that arose in the literature were informed consent, lack of adherence to best practice guidelines, lack of education of non-genetic health professionals on the provision of genetic services, psychological impacts of genetic testing, continuity of care, the complexity of genetic test results, confidentiality, risks of medical mismanagement, and the associated medical responsibility liabilities. Despite these challenges, there is a growing consensus towards the feasibility of cancer genetic testing being undertaken by non-genetic healthcare professionals in a collaborative oncogenetics service model.

Adapting a Theoretically-Based intervention for underserved clinical populations at increased risk for hereditary Cancer: Lessons learned from the BRCA-Gist experience

•

The use of GCT in underserved diverse populations is suboptimal.

•

Translational genomics research has been conducted with mostly NHW.

•

Adapting EBIs can enhance the reach of EBI to underserved diverse populations.

•

This paper describes the adaptation BRCA Gist, for at-risk Blacks and Latinas.

•

Findings illustrate the need to integrate fidelity and adaptation considerations.

Background

Minorities at increased risk for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) frequently have low awareness and use of genetic counseling and testing (GCT). Making sure that evidence-based interventions (EBIs) reach minorities is key to reduce disparities. BRCA-Gist is a theory-informed EBI that has been proven to be efficacious in mostly non-Hispanic White non-clinical populations. We conducted formative work to inform adaptations of BRCA-Gist for use in clinical settings with at-risk diverse women.

Methods

Genetic counselors (n = 20) were recruited nationally; at-risk Latinas and Blacks (n = 21) were recruited in Washington DC and Virginia. They completed the BRCA-Gist EBI between April 2018 – September 2019. Participants completed an acceptability scale and an interview to provide suggestions about implementation adaptations. T-tests for independent samples compared acceptability between at-risk women and genetic counselors. The Consensual Qualitative Research Framework was used to code adaptation suggestions. Suggested adaptations were discussed by a multidisciplinary team to integrate fidelity and adaptation considerations.

Results

At-risk women had a significantly higher acceptability (M = 4.17, SD = 0.47 vs. M = 3.24, SD = 0.64; p = 0.000; scale 1–5) and satisfaction scores (M = 8.3, SD = 1.3 vs. M = 4.2, SD = 2.0; p = 0.000; scale 1–10) than genetic counselors. Genetic counselors and at-risk women suggested contextual (e.g. format) and content (e.g. shortening) adaptations to enhance the fit of BRCA-Gist for diverse clinical populations.

Conclusions

Findings illustrate the process of integrating fidelity and adaptation considerations to ensure that EBIs retain their core components while enhancing the fit to minoritized clinical populations. Future studies will test the efficacy of the adapted BRCA-Gist in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Return of comprehensive tumour genomic profiling results to advanced cancer patients: a qualitative study

Purpose

The introduction of comprehensive tumour genomic profiling (CGP) into clinical oncology allows the identification of molecular therapeutic targets. However, the potential complexity of genomic results and their implications may cause confusion and distress for patients undergoing CGP. We investigated the experience of advanced cancer patients receiving CGP results in a research setting.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with 37 advanced cancer patients were conducted within two weeks of patients receiving CGP results. Interviewees were purposively sampled based on CGP result, cancer type, age and gender to ensure diversity. Themes were derived from interview transcripts using a framework analysis approach.

Results

We identified six themes: (1) hoping against the odds; (2) managing expectations; (3) understanding is cursory; (4) communication of results is cursory; (5) genomics and incurable cancer; and (6) decisions about treatment.

Conclusion

Despite enthusiasm regarding CGP about the hope it provides for new treatments, participants experienced challenges in understanding results, and acceptance of identified treatments was not automatic. Support is needed for patients undergoing CGP to understand the implications of testing and cope with non-actionable results.

A Narrative Review of Implementing Precision Oncology in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Emerging Countries

The therapeutic landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has evolved considerably with the introduction of newer agents, such as poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors targeting DNA damage repair mutations. Combining and sequencing novel and existing therapies appropriately is necessary for optimizing the management of mCRPC and ensuring better treatment outcomes. The purpose of this review is to provide evidence-based answers to key clinical questions on treatment selection, treatment sequencing patterns, and factors influencing treatment decisions in the management of mCRPC in the era of PARP inhibitors. This article can also serve as a comprehensive guide to clinicians for optimizing genetic testing and counseling and management of patients with mCRPC. Although the PROfound study has validated the concept of PARP sensitivity across multiple genes associated with homologous recombination repair (HRR) in mCRPC and highlighted the importance of genomic testing in this at-risk patient population, it still remains unclear how patients with rarer HRR mutations will respond to PARP inhibitors. Therefore, real-world data obtained through registry-based randomized controlled trials in the future may help produce robust scientific evidence for supporting optimal clinician decision-making in the management of mCRPC.

Mainstreaming Genetic Testing for Adult Patients With Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease

PURPOSE

Genetic testing results are currently obtained approximately 1 year after referral to a medical genetics team for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). We evaluated a mainstream genetic testing (MGT) pathway whereby the nephrology team provided pre-test counseling and selection of patients with suspected ADPKD for genetic testing prior to direct patient interaction by a medical geneticist.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

A multidisciplinary team of nephrologists, genetic counselors, and medical geneticists developed an MGT pathway for ADPKD using current testing criteria for adult patient with suspected ADPKD and literature from MGT in oncology.

METHODS

An MGT pathway was assessed using a prospective cohort and compared to a retrospective cohort of 56 patients with ADPKD who received genetic testing using the standard, traditional pathway prior to implementing the MGT for ADPKD. The mainstream pathway was evaluated using time to diagnosis, diagnostic yield, and a patient survey to assess patient perceptions of the MGT pathway.

KEY FINDINGS

We assessed 26 patients with ADPKD using the MGT and 18 underwent genetic testing with return of results. Of them, 52 patients had data available for analysis in the traditional control cohort. The time for return of results using our MGT pathway was significantly shorter with a median time to results of 6 months compared to 12 months for the traditional pathway. We identified causative variants in 61% of patients, variants of uncertain significance in 28%, and 10% had negative testing which is in line with expectations from the literature. The patient surveys showed high satisfaction rates with the MGT pathway.

LIMITATIONS

This report is an evaluation of a new genetic testing pathway restricted to a single, publicly funded health care center. The MGT pathway involved a prospective collection of a limited number of patients with ADPKD with comparison to a retrospective cohort of patients with ADPKD evaluated by standard testing.

IMPLICATIONS

A MGT pathway using clearly defined criteria and commercially available gene panels for ADPKD can be successfully implemented in a publicly funded health care system to reduce the time required to obtain genetic results.

Pilot study of an online training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in oncology healthcare professionals discussing BRCA1/2 genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients

The increasing use of genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other pathogenic variants in the management of women with breast and ovarian cancer necessitates increased genetic literacy in oncology healthcare professionals. This pilot study aimed to evaluate an online training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in Australian oncology healthcare professionals tasked with discussing and coordinating mainstream genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients. A training website with embedded videos was developed. This study assesses the website’s acceptability and user-friendliness; suggestions for improvement were also elicited. Oncology healthcare professionals were recruited through relevant professional organisations, invited to the study by email, asked to work through the website and then complete an online questionnaire. Thirty-two oncology healthcare professionals completed the questionnaire after viewing the website. Nearly all participants were satisfied with the information contained in the program (very satisfied: n = 14/32, 44%, satisfied: n = 17/32, 53%, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied: n = 1/32, 3%) and reported that they had gained new skills (n = 29/32, 91%) and had increased confidence (n = 29/31, 94%) in communicating with breast and ovarian cancer patients about genetic testing. More than 93% (28/30) of participants endorsed the online program as clearly presented, informative, relevant and useful. This pilot study demonstrated high feasibility and acceptability of the training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in oncology healthcare professionals discussing genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients. Further evidence from a randomised trial is needed to evaluate effects on changing clinical practice, improving patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.

"I think that a brief conversation from their provider can go a very long way": Patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators of genetic testing after ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Identify predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting genetic counseling/testing among ovarian cancer patients guided by Green and Kreuter's PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

METHODS

Gynecologic oncology providers (N = 4), genetic counselors (N = 4), and ovarian cancer patients (N = 9) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews exploring participants' knowledge of and experiences with genetic counseling/testing. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using inductive content analysis by two independent raters.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis identified predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting referral for and uptake of genetic counseling/testing. Predisposing factors included participant's knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes related to genetic counseling/testing. Both patients and providers also cited that insurance coverage and out-of-pocket cost are major concerns for ovarian cancer patients considering genetic testing. Finally, both patients and providers emphasized that genetic counseling/testing would provide additional information to an ovarian cancer patient. While providers emphasized that genetic testing results were useful for informing a patient's personal treatment plan, patients emphasized that this knowledge would be beneficial for their family members.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients exist at multiple levels, including the patient (e.g., knowledge, attitudes), the provider (e.g., workload, availability of services), the institution (e.g., difficulty with referrals/scheduling), and the healthcare system (e.g., insurance/cost). Interventions aiming to increase genetic testing among ovarian cancer patients will likely need to target multiple levels of influence. Future quantitative studies are needed to replicate these results. This line of work will inform specific multilevel intervention strategies that are adaptable to different practice settings, ultimately improving guideline concordant care.

Biologic behavior of resected BRCA-mutated pancreatic cancer: Comparison with sporadic pancreatic cancer and other BRCA-related cancers

BACKGROUND

Since margin-negative resection is essential for the cure of pancreatic cancer (PC), early detection of PC is important. Although PC is the third most common cancer associated with BRCA1/2 mutations, clinical research regarding BRCA mutations in resected PC are rare. In this study, we investigated the oncologic characteristics of resected PC with BRCA mutation to suggest management strategies.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 493 patients who were confirmed to be pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation carriers between January 2007 and December 2019. We investigated the oncologic characteristics of PC patients by comparing them with resected sporadic PC and other BRCA-related cancer groups (breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and others).

RESULTS

Ten BRCA mutation carriers (2.0%) experienced PC, and PC onset was significantly later than that of BRCA-related breast cancer (age: breast vs. pancreas, 45.0 vs. 53.5 years, p = 0.050). Six patients underwent pancreatectomy and their long-term survival outcomes did not differ from those of sporadic PC patients (disease free survival: BRCA1/2 vs. sporadic, 10.0 months vs. 9.0 months, p = 0.504; overall survival: BRCA1/2 vs. sporadic, 29.0 months vs. 35.0 months, p = 0.520).

CONCLUSION

BRCA-mutated PC occurs later than BRCA-mutated breast cancer. Active genetic testing to identify BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at the onset of breast cancer and continuous long-term surveillance of these patients can provide opportunities to detect BRCA-mutated PC at a resectable stage.

Barriers and Facilitators to Genetic Service Delivery Models: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Advances in diagnostics testing and treatment of genetic conditions have led to increased demand for genetic services in the United States. At the same time, there is a shortage of genetic services professionals. Thus, understanding the models of service delivery currently in use can help increase access and improve outcomes for individuals identified with genetic conditions.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide an overview of barriers and facilitators to genetic service delivery models to inform future service delivery.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping literature review of the evidence to more fully understand barriers and facilitators around the provision of genetic services.

RESULTS

There were a number of challenges identified, including the limited number of genetics specialists, wait time for appointments, delivery of services by nongenetics providers, reimbursement, and licensure. The ways to address these challenges include the use of health information technology such as telehealth, group genetic counseling, provider-to-provider education, partnership models, and training; expanding genetic provider types; and embedding genetic counselors in clinical settings.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature review highlighted the need to expand access to genetic services. Ways to expand services include telehealth, technical assistance, and changing staffing models. In addition, using technology to improve knowledge among related professionals can help expand access.

Communication skills training for healthcare professionals in providing genetic counseling: A scoping literature review

OBJECTIVE

Genetic counselors need advanced communication skills, particularly when discussing tests involving massively parallel sequencing. Increasingly, non-genetic healthcare professionals (HCPs) also need to provide genetic counseling. Communication skills training (CST) may equip HCPs with the required communication skills. This scoping review provides an overview of the content, approach, effectiveness and effective features of CSTs aimed at improving genetic and non-genetic HCPs' communication skills in providing genetic counseling.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA-ScR statement, four databases were searched for articles. Two researchers independently screened titles and abstracts, and extracted data. When applicable, information on effectiveness and effective features of CST was collated.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles were included. Sixteen CSTs targeted non-genetic HCPs, five targeted genetic HCPs and two targeted both. Most CSTs addressed multiple communication behaviors and consisted of role play. CSTs were found to be effective for improving HCPs (mainly self-reported) attitudes and skills. Limited evidence on specific effective features of CST was found.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear need for evidence on the effectiveness of CST on improving both HCPs' communication skills in the context of genetic counseling, and patient outcomes, and its specific effective features.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinical practice could benefit from evidence-based CST for genetic and non-genetic HCPs.

Previving: How Unaffected Women with a BRCA1/2 Mutation Navigate Previvor Identity

Receiving a positive result for a BRCA1/2 (BRCA) mutation - indicating a high lifetime risk to develop hereditary breast and ovarian cancer - can significantly alter a woman's identity. BRCA-positive women who have not been diagnosed with cancer may be labeled "previvors," which distinguishes those at-risk for developing cancer, but have not had cancer. Using semi-structured interviews (N = 25), this study explored how unaffected BRCA-positive women navigate the previvor identity. Women in this sample differed on their definitions of previvor, views of acceptance, rejection, or ambivalence toward the label, and identification as a previvor. Understanding how women interpret and embrace the previvor identity may help inform communication for those with BRCA genetic mutations, but whom have not been diagnosed with cancer.

Disparities in Genetic Testing and Care among Black women with Hereditary Breast Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite a steady improvement in breast cancer survival rates over the past several decades, mortality disparities remain among Black women, who have a 42% higher death rate compared to non-Hispanic white (NHW) women. Hereditary breast cancer (HBC) accounts for 5-10% of all breast cancer cases, the majority of which are due to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) genes. Despite the availability of BRCA testing for over 25 years, there remain disproportionately lower rates of genetic testing among Blacks compared to NHW due to a multitude of factors. The intent of this review is to discuss racial disparities focused on HBC across diverse populations and review the existing gaps to be addressed when delivering gene-based care.

RECENT FINDINGS

The factors contributing to the racial survival disparity are undoubtedly complex and likely an interplay between tumor biology, genomics, patterns of care and socioeconomic factors. Advances in genomic technologies that now allow for full characterization of germline DNA sequencing are integral in defining the complex and multifactorial cause of breast cancer and may help to explain the existing racial survival disparities.

SUMMARY

Identification of inherited cancer risk may lead to cancer prevention, early cancer detection, treatment guidance, and ultimately has great potential to improve outcomes. Consequently, advances in HBC diagnosis and treatment without widespread implementation have the potential to further widen the existing breast cancer mortality gap between Black and NHW women.

Using patient perspectives to inform communication training materials for health care professionals discussing BRCA mutation testing

Purpose

As demand for genetic testing grows and a wide range of health care professionals (HCPs) are potentially involved in discussions about testing and delivering results, we developed an educational package to help HCPs with these conversations.

Methods

To inform the content of training materials, we conducted interviews with 11 women four of whom had BRCA1 and seven with BRCA2 mutations. Five women had or were currently receiving breast cancer treatment. Ages ranged from 38 to 77 years. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the Framework approach to thematic analysis.

Results

We identified 18 themes and 12 subthemes across the interviews, encompassed by six overarching themes: risk, decision-making, information and understanding, communication and improvement, accessing the system: process and frustration, emotional and social drivers.

Conclusions

The findings informed the didactic components of an educational communication workshop and a summary document for attendees. Qualitative interviews provide an important way of incorporating the patient perspective into communication training materials for HCPs by highlighting key issues that matter most to the patient.

A Web-Based Tool to Automate Portions of Pretest Genetic Counseling for Inherited Cancer

BACKGROUND

Increasing demand for genetic testing for inherited cancer risk coupled with a shortage of providers trained in genetics highlight the potential for automated tools embedded in the clinic process to meet this demand. We developed and tested a scalable, easy-to-use, 12-minute web-based educational tool that included standard pretest genetic counseling elements related to panel-based testing for multiple genes associated with cancer risk.

METHODS

The tool was viewed by new patients at the Vanderbilt Hereditary Cancer Clinic before meeting with a board-certified genetics professional. Pre- and post-tool surveys measured knowledge, feeling informed/empowered to decide about testing, attitudinal values about genetic testing, and health literacy. Of the initial 100 participants, 50 were randomized to only have knowledge measured on the post-tool survey to assess for a priming effect.

RESULTS

Of 360 patients approached, 305 consented and completed both the pre- and post-tool surveys, with a mean age of 47 years, including 80% female patients and 48% patients with cancer. Survey results showed an increase in knowledge and feeling informed/empowered after viewing the tool (P<.001), but no significant change in attitude (P=.64). Post-tool survey data indicated no difference in median knowledge between low and high health literacy groups (P=.30). No priming effect was present among the initial 100 participants (P=.675).

CONCLUSIONS

Viewing the educational tool resulted in significant gains in knowledge across health literacy levels, and most individuals felt informed and empowered to decide about genetic testing. These findings indicate that the use of an automated pretest genetic counseling tool may help streamline the delivery of genetic services.

The composition and capacity of the clinical genetics workforce in high-income countries: a scoping review

As genetics becomes increasingly integrated into all areas of health care and the use of complex genetic tests continues to grow, the clinical genetics workforce will likely face greatly increased demand for its services. To inform strategic planning by health-care systems to prepare to meet this future demand, we performed a scoping review of the genetics workforce in high-income countries, summarizing all available evidence on its composition and capacity published between 2010 and 2019. Five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PAIS, CINAHL, and Web of Science) and gray literature sources were searched, resulting in 162 unique studies being included in the review. The evidence presented includes the composition and size of the workforce, the scope of practice for genetics and nongenetics specialists, the time required to perform genetics-related tasks, case loads of genetics providers, and opportunities to increase efficiency and capacity. Our results indicate that there is currently a shortage of genetics providers and that there is a lack of consensus about the appropriate boundaries between the scopes of practice for genetics and nongenetics providers. Moreover, the results point to strategies that may be used to increase productivity and efficiency, including alternative service delivery models, streamlining processes, and the automation of tasks.

A systematic review of communication interventions to help healthcare professionals discuss genetic testing for breast cancer

Purpose

This systematic review examined educational training interventions for healthcare professionals (HCPs) discussing genetic testing and risk for hereditary breast cancer. There was a particular focus on the presence, and content, of communication elements within these packages.

Methods

Searches were run via CINAHL, EMBASE, PUBMED, and PsychInfo in February 2019 to identify training interventions available to HCPs with reference to communication skills. Studies were assessed for quality, with relevant intervention and outcome data extracted and synthesized. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement and was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42019124010).

Results

Of 3,988 items, seven papers, two of which were linked, were eligible for inclusion. There was a mix of randomized and single arm studies with web-based and face-to-face interventions. Content included an overview of genetics, hereditary and familial background, and recommended practice techniques. Outcomes focused on communication, self-efficacy, knowledge, and satisfaction. Interventions were designed for genetic counselors, physicians, primary care physicians (PCPs), medical students, and nurses. None of the papers featured oncologists or surgeons.

Conclusions

This review revealed an overall lack of publications which evaluated interventions to assist HCPs discussing hereditary breast cancer risk and testing. Studies failed to operationalize which ‘communication skills’ they included, nor did they consistently report randomization, outcome measures, or analysis.

Discussing the need for, and management of, genetic testing for inherited cancer risk with individuals and their families can be challenging. As genetic testing in breast cancer becomes more common, the provision of specific communication-based training programs, with reference to genetic testing, risk assessments, and counseling skills is warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-020-05741-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BRCA and Motherhood: A Matter of Time and Timing

The threat of cancer and the effects of risk-reducing surgery can have a significant impact on family planning and family life. In this qualitative study, we examine intersecting experiences of BRCA carrier status, subsequent risk-reducing surgery, and motherhood by analyzing in-depth interviews with 16 Jewish, Israeli mothers (ages 36-57) who underwent risk-reducing mastectomies and/or oophorectomies. Time emerged as a prism through which the BRCA motherhood experience could be viewed. In the "Findings" section, we present concepts of BRCA time and maternal time through three subthemes: (a) objective and subjective fertility clocks and BRCA: the child who won't be born; (b) synchronizing the clocks: the "correct" tempo and chronology; and (c) back to the future: intergenerational coalescence of time. We discuss the notions of time and existential health threats and subjective time in the primary mother-infant relational system within the context of the cultural ideal of the "motherhood myth."

Legacy Genetic Testing Results for Cancer Susceptibility: How Common are Conflicting Classifications in a Large Variant Dataset from Multiple Practices?

PURPOSE

The classification of germline variants may differ between labs and change over time. We apply a variant harmonization tool, Ask2Me VarHarmonizer, to map variants to ClinVar and identify discordant variant classifications in a large multipractice variant dataset.

METHODS

A total of 7496 variants sequenced between 1996 and 2019 were collected from 11 clinical practices. Variants were mapped to ClinVar, and lab-reported and ClinVar variant classifications were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Of the 4798 unique variants identified, 3699 (77%) were mappable to ClinVar. Among mappable variants, variants of unknown significance (VUS) accounted for 74% of lab-reported classifications and 60% of ClinVar classifications. Lab-reported and ClinVar discordances were present in 783 unique variants (21.2% of all mappable variants); 121 variants (2.5% of all unique variants) had within-practice lab-reported discordances; and 56 variants (1.2% of all unique variants) had lab-reported discordances across practices. The unmappable variants were associated with a higher proportion of lab-reported pathogenic classifications (50% vs. 21%, p < 0.0001) and a lower proportion of lab-reported VUS classifications (46% vs. 74%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that discordant variant classification occurs frequently, which may lead to inappropriate recommendations for prophylactic treatments or clinical management.

Patterns and predictors of genetic referral among ovarian cancer patients at a National Cancer Institute-Comprehensive Cancer Center

Germline mutations (eg, BRCA1/2) have prognostic and treatment implications for ovarian cancer (OVCA) patients. Thus, national guidelines recommend genetic testing for OVCA patients. The present study examines patterns and predictors of genetics referral in OVCA patients. Electronic medical record data were abstracted retrospectively from 557 OVCA patients treated from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2015. Logistic regression models identified sociodemographic characteristics, disease/treatment characteristics, family history data, provider characteristics, and survival data that predicted genetics referral. Overall, 27.5% of patients received referral. Eleven variables predicting referral were selected during stepwise regression: younger age, White race, not having private insurance, professional school education, year of OVCA diagnosis, platinum sensitivity, female gynecologic oncologist, chemotherapy administered by a gynecologic oncologist, clinical trial enrollment, longer overall survival, and family history of OVCA. Genetics referral among OVCA patients was similar to rates reported nationwide. Unique predictive factors will contribute to quality improvement and should be validated at a multi-institutional level to ensure guideline concordant care is provided to all OVCA patients. Future research should identify both patient-level and provider-level factors associated with genetics referral.

Referral frequency, attrition rate, and outcomes of germline testing in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Hereditary predisposition is estimated to account for 10% of all pancreatic cancer cases. However, referral patterns and clinical workflow for germline testing in this disease differ significantly by institution, and many at-risk patients may not undergo appropriate counseling and testing. We undertook an analysis of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (PDAC) who were referred to the Clinical Genetics program of a high-volume academic center over a 3-year period to assess referral frequency, evaluate the yield of germline testing in this selected patient cohort, and elucidate the reasons individuals did not undergo recommended germline testing. Medical records of patients with PDAC referred for genetic counseling between January 2015 and October 2017 were reviewed for demographic, medical/family history, and disease-specific data. If testing did not occur, reasons were documented. Genetic test results were categorized as negative, variants of unknown significance, or established pathogenic mutations. Descriptive statistics included means with standard deviations; associations were analyzed with t test and Fisher's exact test. 32% (137 of 432) of PDAC patients were referred for genetic counseling, but only 64% attended their appointment and 60% ultimately underwent germline testing. Common reasons for attrition included worsening disease severity, lack of patient follow-up, insurance concerns, and logistic/travel challenges. Pathogenic germline mutations were detected in 20% (16 of 82) of patients tested, distributed across races/ethnicities, and significantly associated with younger age and positive family history of breast cancer. PDAC patients frequently do not undergo genetic counseling/germline testing despite appropriate referrals, highlighting a need to develop streamlined processes to engage more patients in testing, especially those with high-risk features.

Factors affecting breast cancer patients' need for genetic risk information: From information insufficiency to information need

Information-seeking models typically focus on information-seeking behaviors based on individuals' interest in information, because their current level is perceived to be insufficient. In the context of genetic risk information (GRI), however, information insufficiency is difficult to measure and thus can limit understanding of information behavior in the context of GRI. We propose that an individual's need for information might be a more direct and conceptually clearer alternative to predicting their information-seeking behavior. To test this hypothesis, this study investigates the extent to which previously identified factors affecting interest in GRI are also predictors of need for GRI among women diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 40 or younger (N = 1,069). As hypothesized, there was a positive association between interest in and need for GRI. Furthermore, hypothesized factors of numeracy, information orientation, and genetic knowledge were significant predictors of increased interest in and need for GRI. In contrast, hypothesized factors of genetic worry and genetic causal belief predicted increased interest in GRI only, while genetic self-efficacy predicted increased need for GRI only. As hypothesized, BRCA status significantly moderated associations between informational norm and both interest in and need for GRI. Collectively, the findings support inclusion of need for GRI in theoretical information-seeking models in the context of genomic risk.

Creation and Implementation of an Environmental Scan to Assess Cancer Genetics Services at Three Oncology Care Settings

An environmental scan (ES) is an efficient mixed-methods approach to collect and interpret relevant data for strategic planning and project design. To date, the ES has not been used nor evaluated in the clinical cancer genetics setting. We created and implemented an ES to inform the design of a quality improvement (QI) project to increase the rates of adherence to national guidelines for cancer genetic counseling and genetic testing at three unique oncology care settings (OCS). The ES collected qualitative and quantitative data from reviews of internal processes, past QI efforts, the literature, and each OCS. The ES used a data collection form and semi-structured interviews to aid in data collection. The ES was completed within 6 months, and sufficient data were captured to identify opportunities and threats to the QI project's success, as well as potential barriers to, and facilitators of guideline-based cancer genetics services at each OCS. Previously unreported barriers were identified, including inefficient genetic counseling appointment scheduling processes and the inability to track referrals, genetics appointments, and genetic test results within electronic medical record systems. The ES was a valuable process for QI project planning at three OCS and may be used to evaluate genetics services in other settings.

Movement of Genetic Counselors from Clinical to Non-clinical Positions: Identifying Driving Forces

A previous study of genetic counselors (GCs) in the state of Indiana identified movement out of clinical positions within the past 2 years. The aims of this study were to determine if this trend is nationwide and identify reasons why GCs are leaving their positions and factors that might help employers attract and retain GCs. An email was sent to members of the American Board of Genetic Counseling with a link to an online confidential survey. There were 939 responses (23.5% response rate). Overall, 52% of GCs report being highly satisfied in their current position, although almost two thirds think about leaving and one third had changed jobs within the past 2 years. Of those who had changed jobs (n = 295), 74.9% had been working in a hospital/clinic setting but only 46.3% currently do, demonstrating a major shift out of the clinic (p < 0.001). The top three reasons cited for leaving a position were work environment/institutional climate, salary/benefits, and a lack of feeling valued/recognized as a professional. These results confirm that GCs are moving out of clinical positions and document elements of job satisfaction. We suggest points for employers to consider when trying to recruit or retain GCs.

Evaluation of psychosocial aspects in participants of cancer genetic counseling

Background

The instrument called “Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale” (HADS) is frequently used to evaluate anxious and depressive symptomatology in patients who receive Cancer Genetic Counseling (CGC). However, this instrument cannot identify all of the psychosocial factors, such as the antecedents of the patients’ emotional states or their concerns. The objective of the present research was to compare cases detected with psychosocial alterations by means of HADS and a Psychological Health Interview (PHI).

Methods

A transversal analytical design was used. One hundred ten participants were included (97.3% females and 2.7% males). The average age was 45 years ±10 years.

Results

The PHI identified twice the amount of participants with psychosocial alterations than did HADS, which only detected 43% of these participants.

Conclusions

The results of our study suggest that the PHI should be applied in addition to HADS to identify participants who would require psychological support due to recurrent concerns.

"When information is not enough": A model for understanding BRCA-positive previvors' information needs regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

OBJECTIVE

To investigate BRCA-positive, unaffected patients' - referred to as previvors - information needs after testing positive for a deleterious BRCA genetic mutation.

METHODS

25 qualitative interviews were conducted with previvors. Data were analyzed using the constant comparison method of grounded theory.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed a theoretical model of previvors' information needs related to the stage of their health journey. Specifically, a four-stage model was developed based on the data: (1) pre-testing information needs, (2) post-testing information needs, (3) pre-management information needs, and (4) post-management information needs. Two recurring dimensions of desired knowledge also emerged within the stages-personal/social knowledge and medical knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

While previvors may be genetically predisposed to develop cancer, they have not been diagnosed with cancer, and therefore have different information needs than cancer patients and cancer survivors.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This model can serve as a framework for assisting healthcare providers in meeting the specific information needs of cancer previvors.

Primary care providers' cancer genetic testing-related knowledge, attitudes, and communication behaviors: A systematic review and research agenda

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) can play a critical role in helping patients receive the preventive health benefits of cancer genetic risk information. Thus, the objective of this systematic review was to identify studies of US PCPs' knowledge, attitudes, and communication-related behaviors regarding genetic tests that could inform risk-stratification approaches for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening in order to describe current findings and research gaps.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of six electronic databases to identify peer-reviewed empirical articles relating to US PCPs and genetic testing for breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer published in English from 2008 to 2016. We reviewed these data and used narrative synthesis methods to integrate findings into a descriptive summary and identify research needs.

RESULTS

We identified 27 relevant articles. Most focused on genetic testing for breast cancer (23/27) and colorectal cancer risk (12/27); only one study examined testing for prostate cancer risk. Most articles addressed descriptive research questions (24/27). Many studies (24/27) documented PCPs' knowledge, often concluding that providers' knowledge was incomplete. Studies commonly (11/27) examined PCPs' attitudes. Across studies, PCPs expressed some concerns about ethical, legal, and social implications of testing. Attitudes about the utility of clinical genetic testing, including for targeted cancer screening, were generally favorable; PCPs were more skeptical of direct-to-consumer testing. Relatively fewer studies (9/27) examined PCPs' communication practices regarding cancer genetic testing.

DISCUSSION

This review indicates a need for investigators to move beyond descriptive research questions related to PCPs' knowledge and attitudes about cancer genetic testing. Research is needed to address important gaps regarding the development, testing, and implementation of innovative interventions and educational programs that can improve PCPs' genetic testing knowledge, assuage concerns about the appropriateness of cancer genetic testing, and promote open and effective patient-provider communication about genetic risk and genetic testing.

Key messages for communicating information about BRCA1 and BRCA2 to women with breast or ovarian cancer: Consensus across health professionals and service users

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing of cancer predisposing genes will increasingly be needed in oncology clinics to target cancer treatment. This Delphi study aimed to identify areas of agreement and disagreement between genetics and oncology health professionals and service users about the key messages required by women with breast/ovarian cancer who undergo BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing and the optimal timing of communicating key messages.

METHODS

Participants were 16 expert health professionals specialising in oncology/genetics and 16 service users with breast/ovarian cancer and a pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 variant. Online questionnaires containing 53 inductively developed information messages were circulated to the groups separately. Participants rated each message as key/not key on a Likert scale and suggested additional messages. Questionnaires were modified according to the feedback and up to 3 rounds were circulated. Consensus was reached when there was ≥75% agreement.

RESULTS

Thirty key messages were agreed by both groups with 7 of the key messages agreed by ≥95% of participants: dominant inheritance, the availability of predictive testing, the importance of pretest discussion, increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer, and the option of risk-reducing mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Both groups agreed that key messages should be communicated before genetic testing and once a pathogenic variant has been identified.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high level of agreement within and between the groups about the information requirements of women with breast/ovarian cancer about BRCA1/BRCA2. These key messages will be helpful in developing new approaches to the delivery of information as genetic testing becomes further integrated into mainstream oncology services.

Non-genetic health professionals' attitude towards, knowledge of and skills in discussing and ordering genetic testing for hereditary cancer

Non-genetic health professionals (NGHPs) have insufficient knowledge of cancer genetics, express educational needs and are unprepared to counsel their patients regarding their genetic test results. So far, it is unclear how NGHPs perceive their own communication skills. This study was undertaken to gain insight in their perceptions, attitudes and knowledge. Two publically accessible databases were used to invite NGHPs providing cancer genetic services to complete a questionnaire. The survey assessed: sociodemographic attributes, experience in ordering hereditary cancer genetic testing, attitude, knowledge, perception of communication skills (e.g. information giving, decision-making) and educational needs. Of all respondents (N = 49, response rate 11 %), most have a positive view of their own information giving (mean = 53.91, range 13–65) and decision making skills (64–77 % depending on topic). NGHPs feel responsible for enabling disease and treatment related behavior (89–91 %). However, 20–30 % reported difficulties managing patients’ emotions and did not see management of long-term emotions as their responsibility. Correct answers on knowledge questions ranged between 41 and 96 %. Higher knowledge was associated with more confidence in NGHPs’ own communication skills (r_s = .33, p = 0.03). Although NGHPs have a positive view of their communication skills, they perceive more difficulties managing emotions. The association between less confidence in communication skills and lower knowledge level suggests awareness of knowledge gaps affects confidence. NGHPs might benefit from education about managing client emotions. Further research using observation of actual counselling consultations is needed to investigate the skills of this specific group of providers.

A collaborative approach to cancer risk assessment services using genetic counselor extenders in a multi-system community hospital

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate a unique approach to cancer risk assessment for improved access by smaller rural communities.

METHODS

Local, on-site nurse navigators were trained and utilized as genetic counselor extenders (GCEs) to provide basic risk assessment and offer BRCA1/2 genetic testing to select patients based on a triaging process in collaboration with board-certified genetic counselors (CGCs).

RESULTS

From August 2012 to July 2014, 12,477 family history questionnaires representing 8937 unique patients presenting for a screening mammogram or new oncology appointment were triaged. Of these, 8.2 % patients were identified at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer, and 4.2 % were identified at increased risk for other hereditary causes of cancer. A total of 75 of 1130 at-risk patients identified (6.6 %) completed a genetic risk assessment appointment; 23 with a GCE and 52 with a CGC. A review of the completed genetic test requisition forms from a 9-year pre-collaboration time period found that 16 % (20/125) did not appear to meet genetic testing criteria. Overall, there was a fourfold increase in patients accessing genetic services in this study period compared to the pre-collaboration time period. Efficiency of this model was assessed by determining time spent by the CGC in all activities related to the collaboration, which amounted to approximately 16 h/month. Adjustments have been made and the program continues to be monitored for opportunities to improve efficiency.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the feasibility of CGCs and GCEs collaborating to improve access to quality services in an efficient manner.

Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone Delivery of BRCA1/2 Genetic Counseling Compared With In-Person Counseling: 1-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

The ongoing integration of cancer genomic testing into routine clinical care has led to increased demand for cancer genetic services. To meet this demand, there is an urgent need to enhance the accessibility and reach of such services, while ensuring comparable care delivery outcomes. This randomized trial compared 1-year outcomes for telephone genetic counseling with in-person counseling among women at risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer living in geographically diverse areas.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using population-based sampling, women at increased risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to in-person (n = 495) or telephone genetic counseling (n = 493). One-sided 97.5% CIs were used to estimate the noninferiority effects of telephone counseling on 1-year psychosocial, decision-making, and quality-of-life outcomes. Differences in test-uptake proportions for determining equivalency of a 10% prespecified margin were evaluated by 95% CIs.

RESULTS

At the 1-year follow-up, telephone counseling was noninferior to in-person counseling for all psychosocial and informed decision-making outcomes: anxiety (difference [d], 0.08; upper bound 97.5% CI, 0.45), cancer-specific distress (d, 0.66; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.28), perceived personal control (d, -0.01; lower bound 97.5% CI, -0.06), and decisional conflict (d, -0.12; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.03). Test uptake was lower for telephone counseling (27.9%) than in-person counseling (37.3%), with the difference of 9.4% (95% CI, 2.2% to 16.8%). Uptake was appreciably higher for rural compared with urban dwellers in both counseling arms.

CONCLUSION

Although telephone counseling led to lower testing uptake, our findings suggest that telephone counseling can be effectively used to increase reach and access without long-term adverse psychosocial consequences. Further work is needed to determine long-term adherence to risk management guidelines and effective strategies to boost utilization of primary and secondary preventive strategies.

Evolution of Hereditary Breast Cancer Genetic Services: Are Changes Reflected in the Knowledge and Clinical Practices of Florida Providers?

AIMS

We describe practitioner knowledge and practices related to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in an evolving landscape of genetic testing.

METHODS

A survey was mailed in late 2013 to Florida providers who order HBOC testing. Descriptive statistics were conducted to characterize participants' responses.

RESULTS

Of 101 respondents, 66% indicated either no genetics education or education through a commercial laboratory. Although 79% of respondents were aware of the Supreme Court ruling resulting in the loss of Myriad Genetics' BRCA gene patent, only 19% had ordered testing from a different laboratory. With regard to pretest counseling, 78% of respondents indicated they usually discuss 11 of 14 nationally recommended elements for informed consent. Pretest discussion times varied from 3 to 120 min, with approximately half spending <20 min. Elements not routinely covered by >40% of respondents included (1) possibility of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) and (2) issues related to life/disability insurance. With regard to genetic testing for HBOC, 88% would test an unaffected sister of a breast cancer patient identified with a BRCA VUS.

CONCLUSIONS

Results highlight the need to identify whether variability in hereditary cancer service delivery impacts patient outcomes. Findings also reveal opportunities to facilitate ongoing outreach and education.

"It's not if I get cancer, it's when I get cancer": BRCA-positive patients' (un)certain health experiences regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

RATIONALE

Women with a harmful mutation in the BReast CAncer (BRCA) gene are at significantly increased risk of developing hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) during their lifetime, compared to those without. Such patients-with a genetic predisposition to develop cancer but who have not yet been diagnosed with cancer-live in a constant state of uncertainty and wonder not if they might get cancer but when.

OBJECTIVE

Framed by uncertainty management theory, the purpose of this study was to explore BRCA-positive patients' health experiences after testing positive for the BRCA genetic mutation, specifically identifying their sources of uncertainty.

METHODS

Thirty-four, qualitative interviews were conducted with female patients. Participants responded to online research postings on the non-profit organization Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered's (FORCE) message board and social media pages as well as HBOC-specific Facebook groups. The interview data were coded using the constant comparison method.

RESULTS

Two major themes representing BRCA-positive patients' sources of uncertainty regarding their genetic predisposition and health experiences emerged from the data. Medical uncertainty included the following three subthemes: the unknown future, medical appointments, and personal cancer scares. Familial uncertainty encompassed the subthemes traumatic family cancer memories and motherhood.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the study supports and extends existing research on uncertainty-revealing uncertainty is inherent in BRCA-positive patients' health experiences-and offers new insight regarding uncertainty management and HBOC risk.

Patient Perceptions of Telephone vs. In-Person BRCA1/BRCA2 Genetic Counseling

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk has been associated with positive outcomes in high risk women. However, little is known about how patients perceive TC. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus usual care (UC; in-person genetic counseling), we compared high risk women's perceptions of: (1) overall satisfaction with genetic counseling; (2) convenience; (3) attentiveness during the session; (4) counselor effectiveness in providing support; and (5) counselor ability to recognize emotional responses during the session. Among the 554 participants (TC, N = 272; UC, N = 282), delivery mode was not associated with self-reported satisfaction. However, TC participants found counseling significantly more convenient than UC participants (OR = 4.78, 95 % CI = 3.32, 6.89) while also perceiving lower levels of support (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.40-0.80) and emotional recognition (OR = 0.53, 95 % CI = 0.37-0.76). In exploratory analyses, we found that non-Hispanic white participants reported higher counselor support in UC than in TC (69.4 % vs. 52.8 %; OR = 3.06, 95 % CI = 1.39-6.74), while minority women perceived less support in UC vs. TC (58.3 % vs. 38.7 %; OR = 0.80, 95 % CI = 0.39-1.65). We discuss potential research and practice implications of these findings which may further improve the effectiveness and utilization of TC.

Alternate Service Delivery Models in Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Mini-Review

Demand for cancer genetic counseling has grown rapidly in recent years as germline genomic information has become increasingly incorporated into cancer care, and the field has entered the public consciousness through high-profile celebrity publications. Increased demand and existing variability in the availability of trained cancer genetics clinicians place a priority on developing and evaluating alternate service delivery models for genetic counseling. This mini-review summarizes the state of science regarding service delivery models, such as telephone counseling, telegenetics, and group counseling. Research on comparative effectiveness of these models in traditional individual, in-person genetic counseling has been promising for improving access to care in a manner acceptable to patients. Yet, it has not fully evaluated the short- and long-term patient- and system-level outcomes that will help answer the question of whether these models achieve the same beneficial psychosocial and behavioral outcomes as traditional cancer genetic counseling. We propose a research agenda focused on comparative effectiveness of available service delivery models and how to match models to patients and practice settings. Only through this rigorous research can clinicians and systems find the optimal balance of clinical quality, ready and secure access to care, and financial sustainability. Such research will be integral to achieving the promise of genomic medicine in oncology.

Breast Cancer Genetic Counseling: A Surgeon's Perspective

As surgeons who care for patients with breast cancer, the possibility of a cancer diagnosis being related to a hereditary predisposition is always a consideration. Not only are we as surgeons always trying to identify these patients and families but also we are often asked about a potential hereditary component by the patients and their family members. It is therefore critical that we accurately assess patients to determine who may benefit from genetic testing. Importantly, the potential benefit for identifying a hereditary breast cancer extends beyond the patient to other family members and the risk may not be only for the development of breast cancers, but for other cancers as well. This review was written from the perspective of a surgeon with additional training in cancer genetics in an effort to provide a unique perspective on the issue and feel that a review of some of the more practical considerations is important.

Lifestyle Risk Factors Among People Who Have Had Cancer Genetic Testing

Hereditary cancer genetic counseling often focuses on medically intensive risk-reduction strategies, like imaging and risk-reducing surgeries. Lifestyle factors also influence cancer risk, but health behavior counseling is not common in genetic counseling. Information about typical lifestyle risk factors among patients seeking hereditary cancer risk is sparse. The current study describes cancer risk-relevant lifestyle factors for people who have had cancer genetic testing. Data came from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4) collected in 2013. Analytic variables represented American Cancer Society nutrition and physical activity guidelines. Lifestyle factors were assessed for people who had undergone testing for BRCA1, BRCA2, or Lynch Syndrome genes. Among 3016 HINTS respondents, 135 had cancer genetic testing. Of these, 58 % were overweight or obese. Eighteen percent reported no moderate-intensity physical activity. Average sedentary screen-time was 3.4 h (SE = 0.472) daily. Sixty-three percent drank non-diet soda, and 23 % of these people drank soda every day. Between 18 and 36 % consumed less than 2 ½ cups fruits/vegetables daily. Twenty-four percent were current smokers. Lifestyle risk factors were not different between people who had genetic testing and those who had not. In conclusion, most people who had genetic testing for cancer susceptibility have at least one modifiable risk factor. Genetic counselors have opportunities to impact a counselee's cancer risk not only through risk-tailored medical procedures, but also through lifestyle modification recommendations. Results of the current study may foster a broader discussion of genetic counselors' roles in healthy lifestyle education.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing-pitfalls and recommendations for managing variants of uncertain clinical significance

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of BRCA1/2 testing for tailoring cancer treatment and extension of testing to tumour tissue for somatic mutation is moving BRCA1/2 mutation screening from a primarily prevention arena delivered by specialist genetic services into mainstream oncology practice. A considerable number of gene tests will identify rare variants where clinical significance cannot be inferred from sequence information alone. The proportion of variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) is likely to grow with lower thresholds for testing and laboratory providers with less experience of BRCA. Most VUS will not be associated with a high risk of cancer but a misinterpreted VUS has the potential to lead to mismanagement of both the patient and their relatives.

DESIGN

Members of the Clinical Working Group of ENIGMA (Evidence-based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles) global consortium (www.enigmaconsortium.org) observed wide variation in practices in reporting, disclosure and clinical management of patients with a VUS. Examples from current clinical practice are presented and discussed to illustrate potential pitfalls, explore factors contributing to misinterpretation, and propose approaches to improving clarity.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Clinicians, patients and their relatives would all benefit from an improved level of genetic literacy. Genetic laboratories working with clinical geneticists need to agree on a clinically clear and uniform format for reporting BRCA test results to non-geneticists. An international consortium of experts, collecting and integrating all available lines of evidence and classifying variants according to an internationally recognized system, will facilitate reclassification of variants for clinical use.

Differences in BRCA counseling and testing practices based on ordering provider type

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess potential differences in genetic counseling services delivered by board-certified genetic health-care providers versus non-genetic health-care providers. We evaluated (i) patient recall and content of pretest genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and (ii) whether full BRCA1 and 2 gene sequencing was performed when less expensive single-site or Ashkenazi Jewish founder mutation testing may have been sufficient.

METHODS

Participants completed a questionnaire and provided BRCA test reports that included testing provider and type of test. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Of 473 participants, >90% were white, female, and BRCA mutation carriers. Of the 276 (58%) with genetic health-care provider involvement, 97% recalled a pretest discussion as compared with 59% of those without genetic health-care provider involvement (P < 0.001). Among the subgroup who recalled a pretest discussion (n = 385), those with genetic health-care provider involvement indicated higher adherence to eight recognized genetic counseling elements, four of which were statistically significant. Furthermore, involvement of a genetic health-care provider halved the likelihood that comprehensive BRCA testing was ordered among the 266 for whom single-site or multisite-3 testing may have been sufficient (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that genetic health-care provider involvement is associated with adherence to nationally recommended genetic counseling practices and could potentially reduce costs of BRCA genetic testing.