DNA-testing for BRCA1/2 prior to genetic counselling in patients with breast cancer: design of an intervention study, DNA-direct

Large-scale group genetic counseling: Evaluation of a novel service delivery model in a Canadian hereditary cancer clinic

Increasing demand for genetic services has led to the development of streamlined genetic counseling (GC) models. We piloted large-scale group pre-test GC with up to 50 patients per group and compared this to a traditional one-on-one approach. Patients referred to the British Columbia (BC) Cancer Hereditary Cancer Program were eligible if they had: (a) family history meeting our program's referral criteria; (b) no relevant personal history of cancer; (c) no prior genetic testing in the family; and (d) no living testable relative in BC. Patient-reported outcome measures included: (a) Genetic Counselling Outcome Scale (GCOS) prior to pre-test GC (T1) and at 4 weeks post-test GC (T2); (b) Satisfaction Survey after pre-test GC; and (c) the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) for patients undergoing testing (4 weeks after post-test GC). In total, 391 patients underwent GC, 184 by group and 207 by one-on-one appointments. Between May 2018 and May 2019, 6 pre-test group sessions were conducted (median number of patients per group = 28; range 15-48). 8% of patients (n = 32) declined large group GC due to personal preference for one-on-one GC. There were no statistically significant differences in MICRA and GCOS survey results when comparing the pre-test large group versus traditional pre-test one-on-one models (based on 3 MICRA subscales: p = 0.063, p = 0.612, p = 0.842; and GCOS p = 0.169). Overall, the large group pre-test counseling approach was more time-efficient with 15-48 patient group sessions conducted over a mean duration of 80 min as compared to 42 min per patient with the traditional one-on-one GC model. Large-scale group GC was feasible and acceptable to patients and represents a novel streamlined model for GC to enable timely access to cancer genetic services.

The Screen Project: Guided Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer Susceptibility in Canada

There is limited information of the outcomes of direct-to-consumer testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. The Screen Project was initiated in 2017 to offer BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic screening to all Canadians over the age of 18 who wish to know their mutation status. Patients enrolled in the study from 2017 to 2019 and were followed for one year after the receipt of a genetic test result. Study subjects registered online and were sent a saliva sample kit, which was shipped to the reference laboratory. Pre-test genetic counselling and counselling for mutation-negative subjects was optional and at the individual's discretion. There were 1269 tested individuals between March 2017 and January 2019. A total of 1157 (93%) were women and 87 (7%) were men. Sixty-six percent had a first- or second-degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer. Of the 1269 tested individuals, 30 (2.4%) had a pathogenic mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (20 women and 10 men). Seventy-five percent of the female mutation carriers underwent a bilateral mastectomy and/or salpingo-oophorectomy within a year of receiving a positive result. Genetic counselling was available at no cost to all participants but was requested by only 5% of the non-carriers. The study subjects expressed a high degree of satisfaction with the process.

How can Australia integrate routine genetic sequencing in oncology: a qualitative study through an implementation science lens

PURPOSE

This study sought to determine genetics and oncology specialists' views of integrating BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in epithelial ovarian and breast cancer into routine practice.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were designed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Questions included experiences or views of the BRCA testing processes, implementation needs of oncology health professionals, perceived challenges, and future ideas for interventions to integrate genetic testing into oncology.

RESULTS

Twenty-two participants were interviewed from twelve health organizations and four themes were identified: (1) embracing the shift to mainstream genetic testing, with the majority of participants viewing BRCA testing as clinically useful and routine use important for maintaining a patient centered process; (2) the need for communication networks and role delineation to integrate routine genetic testing; (3) factors that influence sustaining routine genetic testing, including ongoing training, resources and funding, real-world adaptation, system complexity, and champions; and (4) variation in system interventions for integrating routine genetic testing align to organizational context.

CONCLUSION

Findings illustrate the need for integrating genetic testing into routine oncology, and that adaptation of interventions and processes is essential to sustain a feasible model. An understanding of individual and organizational implementation factors will help to prepare for future integration of routine genetic testing in other cancers.

Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review

Genetic testing of patients with cancer is increasingly offered to guide management, resulting in a growing need for oncology health professionals to communicate genetics information and facilitate informed decision-making in a short time frame. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise what is known about health professionals’ communication about genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with cancer patients. Four databases were systematically searched using a recognised scoping review method. Areas and types of research were mapped and a narrative synthesis of the findings was undertaken. Twenty-nine papers from 25 studies were included. Studies were identified about (i) information needs, (ii) process and content of genetic counselling, (iii) cognitive and emotional impact, including risk perception and recall, understanding and interpretation of genetic test results, and anxiety and distress, (iv) patients’ experiences, (v) communication shortly after diagnosis and (vi) alternatives to face-to-face genetic counselling. Patients’ need for cancer-focused, personalised information is not always met by genetic counselling. Genetic counselling tends to focus on biomedical information at the expense of psychological support. For most patients, knowledge is increased and anxiety is not raised by pre-test communication. However, some patients experience anxiety and distress when results are disclosed, particularly those tested shortly after diagnosis who are unprepared or unsupported. For many patients, pre-test communication by methods other than face-to-face genetic counselling is acceptable. Research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from genetic counselling and support and to investigate communication about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer by oncology health professionals.

Evolution of genetic assessment for BRCA-associated gynaecologic malignancies: a Canadian multisociety roadmap

The landscape of genetic testing in ovarian cancer patients has changed dramatically in recent years. The therapeutic benefits of poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in treatment of BRCA1/2-related ovarian cancers has resulted in an increased demand and urgency for genetic testing results, while technological developments have led to widespread use of multi-gene cancer panels and development of tumour testing protocols. Traditional genetic counselling models are no longer sustainable and must evolve to match the rapid evolution of genetic testing technologies and developments in personalized medicine. Recently, representatives from oncology, clinical genetics, molecular genetics, pathology, and patient advocacy came together to create a national multi-disciplinary Canadian consortium. By aligning stakeholder interests, the BRCA Testing to Treatment (BRCA TtoT) Community of Practice aims to develop a national strategy for tumour and germline BRCA1/2 testing and genetic counselling in women with ovarian cancer. This article serves to provide an overview of the recent evolution of genetic assessment for BRCA1/2-associated gynecologic malignancies and outline a Canadian roadmap to facilitate change, improve genetic testing rates, and ultimately improve outcomes for hereditary ovarian cancer patients and their families.

Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in BRCA1/2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11, p = 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172, p < 0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21, p = 0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.

High Satisfaction and Low Distress in Breast Cancer Patients One Year after BRCA-Mutation Testing without Prior Face-to-Face Genetic Counseling

According to standard practice following referral to clinical genetics, most high risk breast cancer (BC) patients in many countries receive face-to-face genetic counseling prior to BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-intake). We evaluated a novel format by prospective study: replacing the intake consultation with telephone, written and digital information sent home. Face-to-face counseling then followed BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-direct). One year after BRCA-result disclosure, 108 participants returned long-term follow-up questionnaires, of whom 59 (55 %) had previously chosen DNA-direct (intervention) versus DNA-intake (standard practice i.e., control: 45 %). Questionnaires assessed satisfaction and psychological distress. All participants were satisfied and 85 % of DNA-direct participants would choose this procedure again; 10 % would prefer DNA-intake and 5 % were undecided. In repeated measurements ANOVA, general distress (GHQ-12, p = 0.01) and BC-specific distress (IES-bc, p = 0.03) were lower in DNA-direct than DNA-intake at all time measurements. Heredity-specific distress (IES-her) did not differ significantly between groups. Multivariate regression analyses showed that choice of procedure did not significantly contribute to either general or heredity-specific distress. BC-specific distress (after BC diagnosis) did contribute to both general and heredity-specific distress. This suggests that higher distress scores reflected BC experience, rather than the type of genetic diagnostic procedure. In conclusion, the large majority of BC patients that used DNA-direct reported high satisfaction without increased distress both in the short term, and 1 year after conclusion of genetic testing.

More breast cancer patients prefer BRCA-mutation testing without prior face-to-face genetic counseling

Currently, most breast cancer (BC) patients receive face-to-face genetic counseling (DNA-intake) prior to BRCA-mutation testing, with generic information regarding hereditary BC and BRCA-mutation testing. This prospective study evaluated a novel format: replacing the intake consultation with telephone, written and digital information sent home, and face-to-face contact following BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-direct). From August 2011 to February 2012, 161 of 233 eligible BC patients referred to our Human Genetics department chose between DNA-direct (intervention) or DNA-intake (control). Exclusion criteria were psychological problems (n = 33), difficulty with Dutch text (n = 5), known BRCA-family (n = 3), non-BRCA-referral (n = 1). 30 declined genetic counseling or study participation. Participants received questionnaires including satisfaction and psychological distress. 59 % chose DNA-direct (p = 0.03), of whom 90 % were satisfied and would choose DNA-direct again (including 6/8 BRCA-mutation carriers); although 27 % hesitated to recommend DNA-direct to other patients. General distress (GHQ-12, p = 0.001) and heredity-specific distress (IES, p = 0.02) scored lower in DNA-direct than DNA-intake, both at baseline and follow-up 2 weeks after BRCA-result disclosure; all scores remained below clinical relevance. DNA-direct participants reported higher website use (53 vs. 32 %, p = 0.01), more referrer information about personal consequences (41 vs. 20 %, p = 0.004) and lower decisional conflict (median 20 [0-88] vs. 25 [0-50], p = 0.01). Processing time in DNA-direct was reduced by 1 month. Mutation detection rate was 8 % in both groups. All BRCA-mutation carriers fulfilled current testing criteria. In conclusion, more BC patients preferred DNA-direct over intake consultation prior to BRCA-mutation testing, the majority being strongly to moderately satisfied with the procedure followed, without increased distress.

Effects of a genetic counseling model on mothers of children with down syndrome: a Brazilian pilot study

Down syndrome occurs in approximately 1:600 live births. Genetic counseling is indicated for these families and may be beneficial for adaptation to the challenges that accompany by this diagnosis. Although the basic counseling goals are similar, there are many models of genetic counseling practiced around the world. The aim of this article is to report the results of a pilot study that evaluated the level of satisfaction with a model of service delivery of genetic counseling practiced in Brazil, the knowledge assimilated about Down syndrome and whether this process resulted in a feeling of well-being and psychological support. Thirty mothers of under 6-month-old children with Down syndrome were interviewed after having two sessions of genetic counseling in a public healthcare service within a period of 30 days. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed by the researchers to collect identification, socioeconomic and demographic data and to assess the client's satisfaction with the model of genetic counseling. Data were collected using both open and closed questions. The reported level of satisfaction was high. The knowledge assimilated about Down syndrome after only two sessions was considered technically vague by raters in 44 % of cases. Most mothers (96.7 %) reported that genetic counseling was beneficial and provided psychological support. The model was considered satisfactory, but further research is needed to identify ways to improve knowledge retention by this population. These results highlight the utility of referring families for genetic counseling when there is a suspicion of a diagnosis of Down syndrome.