Improving calculation, interpretation and communication of familial colorectal cancer risk: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

A dedicated high-quality service for the management of patients with an inherited risk of colorectal cancer

AIM

To demonstrate the quality improvement associated with the implementation of a specialist family history of bowel cancer service in secondary care.

METHOD

The following outcomes were assessed: (1) adherence to the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines for colonoscopic surveillance of individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC); (2) adherence to the revised Bethesda criteria for the identification of CRC patients with suspected Lynch syndrome; (3) identification of inherited syndromes with increased CRC risk; and (4) colonoscopic adenoma detection rate. Data were collected for a 21-month period before and after the establishment of this service for all patients who underwent colonoscopic surveillance for a family history of CRC and all patients newly diagnosed with CRC. Analyses compared the number of colonoscopies performed that were not indicated by BSG guidelines, the average number of years early that patients were screened, the adenoma detection rate and the rate of tumour testing for mismatch repair genes before and after the implementation of the service.

RESULTS

Following the establishment of the service there was a reduction in the number of colonoscopies not indicated by BSG guidelines (39.6% before and 5.8% after, P < 0.001, chi-square test) and surveillance colonoscopy took place at a more appropriate age (10.6 years too early before and 5.9 years early after, P = 0.01, t-test). There was an increased adenoma detection rate (17% before and 31.9% after, P < 0.01, chi-square test) and increased tumour MMR testing (3.4% before and 91.8% after, P < 0.01, chi-square test).

CONCLUSION

The introduction of a family history of bowel cancer service results in improved patient care through improved adherence to guidelines for colonoscopic surveillance and increased cancer detection rates.

Cancer Predisposition Cascade Screening for Hereditary Breast/Ovarian Cancer and Lynch Syndromes in Switzerland: Study Protocol

BACKGROUND

Breast, colorectal, ovarian, and endometrial cancers constitute approximately 30% of newly diagnosed cancer cases in Switzerland, affecting more than 12,000 individuals annually. Hundreds of these patients are likely to carry germline pathogenic variants associated with hereditary breast ovarian cancer (HBOC) or Lynch syndrome (LS). Genetic services (counseling and testing) for hereditary susceptibility to cancer can prevent many cancer diagnoses and deaths through early identification and risk management.

OBJECTIVE

Cascade screening is the systematic identification and testing of relatives of a known mutation carrier. It determines whether asymptomatic relatives also carry the known variant, needing management options to reduce future harmful outcomes. Specific aims of the CASCADE study are to (1) survey index cases with HBOC or LS from clinic-based genetic testing records and determine their current cancer status and surveillance practices, needs for coordination of medical care, psychosocial needs, patient-provider and patient-family communication, quality of life, and willingness to serve as advocates for cancer genetic services to blood relatives, (2) survey first- and second-degree relatives and first-cousins identified from pedigrees or family history records of HBOC and LS index cases and determine their current cancer and mutation status, cancer surveillance practices, needs for coordination of medical care, barriers and facilitators to using cancer genetic services, psychosocial needs, patient-provider and patient-family communication, quality of life, and willingness to participate in a study designed to increase use of cancer genetic services, and (3) explore the influence of patient-provider communication about genetic cancer risk on patient-family communication and the acceptability of a family-based communication, coping, and decision support intervention with focus group(s) of mutation carriers and relatives.

METHODS

CASCADE is a longitudinal study using surveys (online or paper/pencil) and focus groups, designed to elicit factors that enhance cascade genetic testing for HBOC and LS in Switzerland. Repeated observations are the optimal way for assessing these outcomes. Focus groups will examine barriers in patient-provider and patient-family communication, and the acceptability of a family-based communication, coping, and decision-support intervention. The survey will be developed in English, translated into three languages (German, French, and Italian), and back-translated into English, except for scales with validated versions in these languages.

RESULTS

Descriptive analyses will include calculating means, standard deviations, frequencies, and percentages of variables and participant descriptors. Bivariate analyses (Pearson correlations, chi-square test for differences in proportions, and t test for differences in means) will assess associations between demographics and clinical characteristics. Regression analyses will incorporate generalized estimating equations for pairing index cases with their relatives and explore whether predictors are in direct, mediating, or moderating relationship to an outcome. Focus group data will be transcribed verbatim and analyzed for common themes.

CONCLUSIONS

Robust evidence from basic science and descriptive population-based studies in Switzerland support the necessity of cascade screening for genetic predisposition to HBOC and LS. CASCADE is designed to address translation of this knowledge into public health interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03124212; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03124212 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6tKZnNDBt).

Improving recognition and referral of patients with an increased familial risk of colorectal cancer: results from a randomized controlled trial

AIM

Only 12-49% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and their first-degree relatives with an increased familial CRC risk are referred for cancer prevention measures (surveillance colonoscopies or genetic counselling). The study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of a novel strategy to improve the uptake of genetic counselling for high risk individuals and surveillance colonoscopy for moderate risk groups.

METHOD

Eighteen hospitals participated in a clustered randomized controlled trial. Patients in nine hospitals received usual care (group A). Nine other hospitals received the novel strategy (group B) including access to a website for patients and clinicians, patient-targeted brochures and clinician-targeted education and pocket referral cards. Data before and after dissemination of the strategy were collected from questionnaires and medical records.

RESULTS

Data were complete for 358 (44%) of 820 CRC patients and 50 (36%) of 137 clinicians before dissemination of the strategy and 392/862 patients (45%) and 47/137 clinicians (34%) after. Referral for cancer prevention measures was assessed at a median of 8 (2-12) months after CRC diagnosis in groups A and B before the dissemination of the strategy and in group A after. In group B referral was assessed at a median of 9 (4-11) months after the dissemination of the strategy. Uptake of genetic counselling by high risk patients was equal in groups A and B, being 33% before and 15% after (P = 0.003). Uptake of surveillance colonoscopy by moderate risk relatives did not change significantly (group A, 36% before vs 41% after; group B, 33% before vs 19% after). In group B 94/140 patients (67%) and 25/72 clinicians (35%) visited the website and 34/140 (24%) patients read the brochure. Patients valued clinicians' information as most useful, followed by the patient brochure. Clinicians preferred pocket cards and education.

CONCLUSION

Our strategy did not improve referral for cancer prevention measures. Although the newly offered strategy elements were appreciated, patients preferred clinicians' advice regarding referral for cancer prevention measures. It may be useful to aim future interventions at healthcare professionals rather than patients to improve the prevention of familial cancer.

Easy-to-use online referral test detects most patients with a high familial risk of colorectal cancer

AIM

Currently only 12-30% of individuals with a high risk of Lynch syndrome, the most common hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome, are referred for genetic counselling. We assessed the sensitivity, usability and user experiences of a new online referral test aimed at improving referral of high-risk individuals for genetic counselling.

METHOD

Sensitivity was assessed by entering pedigree data from high-risk individuals (i.e. Lynch syndrome mutation carriers) into the referral test to determine whether genetic counselling was recommended. For usability, we assessed nonmedical staff members' ability to determine referral, according to guidelines, in seven fictive clinical cases using the referral test after minimal training. Real-life users answered questions about their experience with the referral test.

RESULT

Sensitivity of the referral test was 91% for mutation carriers with CRC (n = 164) and 73% for all affected and nonaffected mutation carriers (n = 420). Nonmedical staff members (n = 20) determined referral according to guidelines in 84% of cases using the referral test. Ten per cent (256/2470) of real-life users provided feedback about experiences; of those, 71% reported that the referral test increased reassurance, certainty about their familial risk and/or certainty about referral.

CONCLUSION

The referral test has a high sensitivity in detecting individuals with a high risk of Lynch syndrome and is suitable for use in clinical practice. Widespread use of the referral test should improve cancer prevention in high-risk patients and their relatives.

Familial colorectal cancer risk assessment needs improvement for more effective cancer prevention in relatives

AIM

Twelve to thirty % of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and relatives with an increased familial risk of CRC are referred for preventive measures. New guidelines recommend genetic counselling for high-risk families and surveillance colonoscopy for moderate-risk families. Assessment of familial risk of CRC and referral rates for these preventive measures were determined 1 year after the introduction of new guidelines.

METHOD

Assessment of familial risk of CRC and referral for preventive measures were measured in clinical practice among 358 patients with CRC in 18 hospitals using medical records and questionnaires. Additionally, a knowledge survey was performed among 312 clinicians.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven % of patients with an increased familial risk (n = 65/97) were referred for preventive measures, as were 23% (61/261) of low-risk patients. The uptake of genetic counselling in high-risk families was 33% (12/36). The uptake of surveillance colonoscopy in moderate-risk families was 34% (21/61). In the knowledge survey clinicians correctly determined familial risk in 55% and preventive measures in 65% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Currently 67% of individuals with an increased familial risk of CRC were referred for preventive measures. Only one-third were referred in accordance with guidelines.

Shared decision making in the Netherlands, is the time ripe for nationwide, structural implementation?

WHAT ABOUT POLICY REGARDING SDM? The Dutch health care system has been reformed in 2006 to make it more patient-oriented and demand-driven. We shortly describe four strategies of this health care reform. Although research projects are now fully spread over the country, a coordinated research agenda on SDM is lacking. WHAT ABOUT TOOLS - DECISION SUPPORT FOR PATIENTS? The Dutch governmental healthcare internet portal for patients hosts 16 patient decision aids. WHAT ABOUT PROFESSIONAL INTEREST AND IMPLEMENTATION? There is quite a strong patient participation movement in the Netherlands, on macro and meso level. Limited effort, related to the local research projects has been put into training professionals in SDM skills. WHAT DOES THE FUTURE LOOK LIKE? We need concerted action on the level of educating health care professionals, empowering patients, making patient decision aids easily accessible, supporting the professionals in this new task, and measuring the process of SDM in performance indicators used in quality assurance. The Dutch Platform for SDM that will be launched in Maastricht in June 2011 is therefore a timely and relevant initiative.