"Anybody who can clarify or humanize the experience would be such a help": An interpretive description of perceptions of genomic health and nursing care in individuals with cancer predisposition syndromes

PURPOSE

There is increased use of genomic testing in oncology care. Yet, individuals with hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes (CPS) experience challenges when navigating the lifelong CPS healthcare considerations. The purpose of this study is to describe the healthcare experiences of individuals living with CPS and their perceptions of genomic-informed nursing care.

METHODS

Interpretive description (ID) was the qualitative approach used in this patient-oriented research study, conducted in partnership with two individuals with lived experience of CPS. Participants were recruited to participate in an interview using a variety of public and provider/patient network sampling sources. Inductive data analysis was guided by general steps for ID analysis as described by Sally Thorne.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven individuals who self-reported a CPS participated in interviews between April and August 2023. Two primary themes were identified: 1), When genomic knowledge is power, and 2), Perceived acceptability of nursing roles in CPS care. Participants described genomic knowledge as a form of personal and family empowerment, but many reported that CPS-related knowledge is inaccessible in the healthcare system. This often resulted in healthcare experiences that were insufficient and fragmented. Although participants reported minimal nursing involvement in their CPS care, there was a consensus that enhanced nursing contributions could be beneficial. They particularly endorsed the potential value of a dedicated oncology genomic nursing role.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight patient-endorsed opportunities for nurses at the generalized and specialized levels to contribute to improved cancer genomic care. Findings can be used to inform novel models of clinical care for individuals with CPS.

Mainstreaming Cancer Genomic Testing: A Scoping Review of the Acceptability, Efficacy, and Impact

Finite clinical genetics services combined with expanding genomic testing have driven development of mainstreaming models-of-care for genomic testing: specifically genetic counselor embedded (GEM) and upskilled-clinician (UPC) models. To determine feasibility, acceptability, and health economic impact in cancer mainstreaming settings we conducted a scoping review of the literature. A comprehensive PubMed search identified relevant manuscripts, published in English between 2013 and 2023. Of 156 identified articles, 37 proceeded to full review, encompassing five cancer types. In both models-of-care, testing uptake was > 90% and referral/testing rates increased 1.2-6.7-fold. Time from diagnosis to result disclosure decreased 1.5-6-fold and pathogenic variant detection rates were ≥ 10%. GEM model studies evaluated neither cost-effectiveness nor physician/patient outcomes. UPC models were economically viable, primarily through reducing genetics-related appointments. Physicians found the UPC model workload acceptable and reported improvements in knowledge and confidence. Patient distress in the UPC model was low overall and comparable to standard-of-care. Patients' acceptance and satisfaction/decisional satisfaction were high, and continuity-of-care was appreciated. Mainstreaming cancer genomic testing is feasible and beneficial to patients, physicians, and healthcare systems. More studies are needed to capture GEM model impacts and to compare GEM with UPC models. Further detail of allied health and nursing support for the UPC model is also required.

BRCA genetic testing and counseling in breast cancer: how do we meet our patients' needs?

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes that have been linked to inherited susceptibility of breast cancer. Germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (gBRCAm) are clinically relevant for treatment selection in breast cancer because they confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. BRCA1/2 mutation status may also impact decisions on other systemic therapies, risk-reducing measures, and choice of surgery. Consequently, demand for gBRCAm testing has increased. Several barriers to genetic testing exist, including limited access to testing facilities, trained counselors, and psychosocial support, as well as the financial burden of testing. Here, we describe current implications of gBRCAm testing for patients with breast cancer, summarize current approaches to gBRCAm testing, provide potential solutions to support wider adoption of mainstreaming testing practices, and consider future directions of testing.

British Gynaecological Cancer Society/British Association of Gynaecological Pathology consensus for genetic testing in epithelial ovarian cancer in the United Kingdom

Standard of care genetic testing has undergone significant changes in recent years. The British Gynecological Cancer Society and the British Association of Gynecological Pathologists (BGCS/BAGP) has re-assembled a multidisciplinary expert consensus group to update the previous guidance with the latest standard of care for germline and tumor testing in patients with ovarian cancer. For the first time, the BGCS/BAGP guideline group has incorporated a patient advisor at the initial consensus group meeting. We have used patient focused groups to inform discussions related to reflex tumor testing - a key change in this updated guidance. This report summarizes recommendations from our consensus group deliberations and audit standards to support continual quality improvement in routine clinical settings.

Mapping inter-professional collaboration in oncogenetics: Results from a scoping review

Inter-professional collaboration could improve timely access and quality of oncogenetic services. Here, we present the results of a scoping review conducted to systematically identify collaborative models available, unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed, synthesize evidence on their implementation and evaluation, and identify areas where additional research is needed. A comprehensive search was conducted in four journal indexing databases on June 13th, 2022, and complemented with searches of the grey literature and citations. Screening was conducted by two independent reviewers. Eligible documents included those describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of collaborative oncogenetic models. 165 publications were identified, describing 136 unique interventions/studies on oncogenetic models with somewhat overlapping collaborative features. Collaboration appears to be mostly inter-professional in nature, often taking place during risk assessment and pre-testing genetic counseling. Yet, most publications provide very limited information on their collaborative features, and only a few studies have set out to formally evaluate them. Better quality research is needed to comprehensively examine and make conclusions regarding the value of collaboration in this oncogenetics. We propose a definition, logic model, and typology of collaborative oncogenetic models to strengthen future planning, implementation, and evaluation in this field.

Advanced Practice Nursing Titles and Roles in Cancer Care: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Advanced practice nursing roles in cancer care are diverse and exist across the cancer care continuum. However, the titles used and the scope of practice differ across countries. This diversity is likely to be misleading to patients and influence nurses' contribution to health care. An understanding of the current state of advanced practice nursing roles in cancer care internationally is needed to inform opportunities for future role development and enhance cancer nursing career pathways.

METHODS

This scoping review included a systematic search of four databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Academic Search Complete. Independent screening for papers meeting the review's inclusion criteria was undertaken using online screening software. Data extraction, coding, and mapping were undertaken in NVivo 12.

RESULTS

Of the 13,409 records identified, 108 met the review's inclusion criteria. A variety of roles in cancer care settings were described. The United States and the United Kingdom had the most titles for advanced practice nursing roles. Tumor-specific roles were described and integrated into different phases of the cancer care continuum. Trends in continuing professional development for advanced practice nurses in cancer care included the rise in Fellowship programs in the United States and practice-based education in the United Kingdom.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences in advanced practice nursing roles in cancer care allow regional and institutional variation to meet the needs of patient populations and health care system demands. However, a lack of clarity surrounding titles and roles results in confusion and underutilization of these nurses' highly specialized skill sets.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Incongruence in titles and scope of practice internationally will ultimately result in a merging of roles. There is a need for international agreement on education requirements for advanced practice nursing roles to promote career pathways.

An Australian mainstream genetic testing program: Clinicians views about current and future practices

PURPOSE

Germline genetic testing results can guide treatment decisions for oncology patients and are now offered to many cancer patients. Mainstream testing refers to genetic testing arranged by a non-genetics specialist. This repeated cross-sectional study aimed: (1) to capture clinician views on the existing mainstreaming genetic testing program for ovarian, breast, prostate, and endometrial cancer patients, and (2) to ascertain the interest of clinicians to consider changing practice to adopt mainstream testing.

METHODS

Mainstreaming has occurred since 2015 for patients with ovarian and some breast cancer patients, expanding to include prostate cancer patients in 2019, and endometrial cancer patients in 2020. Two web-based surveys were administered within two health districts, covering seven hospitals in NSW.

RESULTS

Fifty-four clinicians (70% response rate) participated. Clinicians who had arranged mainstream genetic testing (n = 30) were overall satisfied (76%), viewed the process as time-efficient and accessible for patients, and desired continuation of the program. Of those clinicians yet to engage in the program (n = 24), 88% expressed an interest in learning about mainstream testing. These clinicians identified time constraints, maintenance of current genetic knowledge, and completing the consenting and counseling process as barriers to mainstreaming. Future mainstreaming models are discussed.

CONCLUSION

From the clinician's perspective, the mainstreaming program is considered a desirable pathway for germline testing of oncology patients. Access to ongoing education and resources is needed for the ongoing success of the program.

Current State of Genomics in Nursing: A Scoping Review of Healthcare Provider Oriented (Clinical and Educational) Outcomes (2012-2022)

In the 20 years since the initial sequencing of the human genome, genomics has become increasingly relevant to nursing. We sought to chart the current state of genomics in nursing by conducting a systematic scoping review of the literature in four databases (2012-2022). The included articles were categorized according to the Cochrane Collaboration outcome domains/sub-domains, and thematic analysis was employed to identify key topical areas to summarize the state of the science. Of 8532 retrieved articles, we identified 232 eligible articles. The articles primarily reported descriptive studies from the United States and other high-income countries (191/232, 82%). More than half (126/232, 54.3%) aligned with the "healthcare provider oriented outcomes" outcome domain. Three times as many articles related to the "knowledge and understanding" sub-domain compared to the "consultation process" subdomain (96 vs. 30). Five key areas of focus were identified, including "nursing practice" (50/126, 40%), "genetic counseling and screening" (29/126, 23%), "specialist nursing" (21/126, 17%), "nurse preparatory education" (17/126, 13%), and "pharmacogenomics" (9/126, 7%). Only 42/126 (33%) articles reported interventional studies. To further integrate genomics into nursing, study findings indicate there is a need to move beyond descriptive work on knowledge and understanding to focus on interventional studies and implementation of genomics into nursing practice.

Management of breast cancer patients with BRCA gene mutations in Jordan: perspectives and challenges

BACKGROUND

This paper explores and discusses local challenges oncologists face for diagnosing and managing breast cancer patients with BRCA gene mutations in Jordan.

METHODS

A task force involving key opinion leaders, experts in the management of breast cancer, and stakeholders in healthcare systems where genetic testing is available in Jordan discussed current evidence and local real-life practice. The task force then formulated recommendations to achieve better patient outcomes and satisfaction based on evidence-based medicine and their clinical experience in BRCA-mutated breast cancer management.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Eligibility of patients for genetic testing, physician acceptance and willingness to integrate genetic testing into routine practice is encouraging but remains restricted by testing availability and financial coverage. Until more data is available, genetic testing should be targeted for breast cancer patients based on tumor subtypes, as well as family and personal history of cancer, as per international guidelines. Whenever possible, genetic testing should aim to detect all actionable genes through a multigene panel including BRCA1/2. Major challenges faced in clinical practice in Jordan include fear of genetic discrimination and social stigmatization, as well as hesitancy toward risk-reducing surgery. Pre-testing counseling is therefore critical to promote acceptance of genetic testing. Since geneticists are in short supply in Jordan, genetic counseling can be offered through a specially trained genetic counselor or through a hybrid system that includes oncologist-based counselling. In addition to cancer prevention, germline genetic testing may assist in the selection of specific anti-cancer therapy, such as PARP inhibitors, in patients with BRCA1/2 mutation. Nationwide initiatives are also needed to ensure access to PARP inhibition therapy and provide financial coverage for genetic screening, mastectomies and reconstructive surgery across Jordan.

On-Site Nurse-Led Cancer Genetics Program Increases Cancer Genetic Testing Completion in Black Veterans

PURPOSE

Telegenetics services can expand access to guideline-recommended cancer genetic testing. However, access is often not distributed equitably to all races and ethnicities. We evaluated the impact of an on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service in a diverse Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) oncology clinic on likelihood of germline testing (GT) completion.

METHODS

We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of patients who were referred for cancer genetics services at the Philadelphia VAMC between October 1, 2020, and February 28, 2022. We evaluated the association between genetics service (on-site v telegenetics) and likelihood of GT completion in a subcohort of new consults, excluding patients with prior consults and those referred for known history of germline mutations.

RESULTS

A total of 238 Veterans, including 108 (45%) seen on site, were identified for cancer genetics services during the study period, with the majority referred for a personal (65%) or family (26%) history of cancer. In the subcohort of new consults, 121 Veterans (54% self-identified race/ethnicity [SIRE]-Black), including 60 (50%) seen on site, were included in the analysis of germline genetic testing completion. In a univariate analysis, patients who were seen by the on-site genetics service had 3.2-fold higher likelihood of completing GT (relative risk, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.89 to 5.48) compared with the telegenetics service. In multivariable regression analysis, the on-site genetics service was associated with higher likelihood of GT completion, but this association was only statistically significant in SIRE-Black compared with SIRE-White Veterans (adjusted RR, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.53 to 14.96; P < .001; P-interaction of race × genetics service = .016).

CONCLUSION

An on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service embedded in a VAMC Oncology practice was associated with higher likelihood of germline genetic testing completion than a telegenetics service among self-identified Black Veterans.

Competencies of the UK nursing and midwifery workforce to mainstream genomics in the National Health Service: the ongoing gap between perceived importance and confidence in genomics

The United Kingdom is recognised worldwide as a leader in genomics. The use of genomic technologies in the National Health Service (NHS) is expected to deliver faster and more accurate diagnoses, supporting personalized treatments to improve patient outcomes. The ambition of embedding genomic medicine in the diagnostic pathway requires involvement of the front-line clinical workforce, known as 'mainstreaming'. Nurses and midwives are the largest professionally qualified workforce in the National Health Service thus, it is anticipated that they will play key roles in mainstreaming. This study investigated the level of competence/confidence of practicing nurses and midwives to support mainstreaming and their perception of the importance of genomics in delivery of patient care. A literature review of genetics/genomics competency frameworks, semi structured interviews of lead nurses and stakeholders were conducted to identify relevant competencies needed for mainstreaming. These were then used to survey four cohorts of nurses (n = 153) across England in four consecutive years (2019-22). The confidence level of these professionals in all aspects of genomics was 2.07 ± 0.47 measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1"Low confidence"; 5 "High confidence"). Intriguingly, these professionals all appreciated the importance of genomics for their patient care (4.01 ± 0.06). Whilst the importance scores increased, the confidence scores declined at the time when major genomic transformation took place in the NHS (e.g.: launch of the Genomic Medicine Service, the National Genomic Test Directory). To bridge this gap, relevant genomic education can play key roles. However, nurses and midwives were found to be grossly underrepresented in formal genomic education courses offered by Health Education England Genomics Education Programme since 2014. This may result from the lack of direct applicability of the currently offered courses for their practice and role. Thematic analysis revealed that nurses and midwives wish to support their patients by providing more information on their condition, inheritance, and treatment options in combination with the use of relevant genetic counselling skills. This study identified easy to follow competencies for embedding genomics into routine clinical care. We propose a training programme that addresses the gap that nurses and midwives currently have, to enable them to harness genomic opportunities for patients and services.

Germline BRCA-Mutated HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Overcoming Challenges in Genetic Testing and Clinical Considerations When Using Talazoparib

Genetic testing is essential to the diagnosis and management of patients with breast cancer. For example, women who carry mutations in BRCA1/2 genes have an increased lifetime risk of breast cancer and the presence of these mutations may sensitize the patient to treatment with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Two PARP inhibitors are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for patients with germline BRCA-mutated advanced breast cancer (olaparib and talazoparib). The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer (Version 2.2023) recommend that all patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (mBC) be assessed for the presence of germline BRCA1/2 mutations. However, many women eligible for genetic testing do not receive it. Here, we provide our perspectives on both the importance of genetic testing and the challenges patients and community clinicians may face when trying to access genetic testing. We also present a hypothetical case study involving a female patient with germline BRCA-mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative mBC to highlight potential clinical considerations on the use of talazoparib, including the decision to initiate therapy, dosing considerations, potential drug-drug interactions, and managing side effects. This case illustrates the benefits of a multidisciplinary approach to managing patients with mBC and involving the patient in the decision-making process. This patient case is fictional and does not represent events or a response from an actual patient; this fictional case is for educational purposes only.

A pilot study investigating feasibility of mainstreaming germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer in three tertiary Cancer Centres in Ireland

In the Republic of Ireland (ROI), BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing has been traditionally undertaken in eligible individuals, after pre-test counselling by a Clinical Geneticist/Genetic Counsellor. Clinical Genetics services in ROI are poorly resourced, with routine waiting times for appointments at the time of this pilot often extending beyond a year. The consequent prolonged waiting times are unacceptable where therapeutic decision-making depends on the patient's BRCA status. "Mainstreaming" BRCA1/BRCA2 testing through routine oncology/surgical clinics has been implemented successfully in other centres in the UK and internationally. We aimed to pilot this pathway in three Irish tertiary centres. A service evaluation project was undertaken over a 6-month period between January and July 2017. Eligible patients, fulfilling pathology and age-based inclusion criteria defined by TGL clinical, were identified, and offered constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing after pre-test counselling by treating clinicians. Tests were undertaken by TGL Clinical. Results were returned to clinicians by secure email. Onward referrals of patients with uncertain/pathogenic results, or suspicious family histories, to Clinical Genetics were made by the treating team. Surveys assessing patient and clinician satisfaction were sent to participating clinicians and a sample of participating patients. Data was collected with respect to diagnostic yield, turnaround time, onward referral rates, and patient and clinician feedback. A total of 101  patients underwent diagnostic germline BRCA1/BRCA2 tests through this pathway. Pathogenic variants were identified in 12 patients (12%). All patients in whom variants were identified were appropriately referred to Clinical Genetics. At least 12 additional patients with uninformative BRCA1/BRCA2 tests were also referred for formal assessment by Clinical Geneticist or Genetic Counsellor. Issues were noted in terms of time pressures and communication of results to patients. Results from a representative sample of participants completing the satisfaction survey indicated that the pathway was acceptable to patients and clinicians. Mainstreaming of constitutional BRCA1/BRCA2 testing guided by age- and pathology-based criteria is potentially feasible for patients with breast cancer as well as patients with ovarian cancer in Ireland.

Patients’ experiences with pre-test genetic counseling provided by breast cancer healthcare professionals: Results from a large prospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Pre-test genetic counseling of patients with breast cancer is increasingly being offered by non-genetic healthcare professionals. We aimed to evaluate the experiences of patients with breast cancer receiving pre-test genetic counseling from a non-genetic healthcare professional (i.e., surgeon or nurse).

METHODS

Patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer and received pre-test counseling from their surgeon or nurse (mainstream group), and patients who received pre-test counseling from a clinical geneticist (usual care group) were invited to participate in our multicenter study. Between September 2019 and December 2021, patients received a questionnaire after pre-test counseling (T0) and four weeks after receiving their test results (T1) to evaluate psychosocial outcomes, knowledge, discussed topics and satisfaction.

RESULTS

We included 191 patients in our mainstream and 183 patients in our usual care group and received, respectively 159 and 145 follow-up questionnaires. Levels of distress and decisional regret were comparable in both groups. Decisional conflict was higher in our mainstream group (p = 0.01), but only 7% had clinically relevant decisional conflict (vs 2% in usual care group). The possible implications of a genetic test on (secondary) breast or ovarian cancer risks were less frequently discussed in our mainstream group (p = 0.03 and p = 0.000, respectively). In both groups knowledge about genetics was comparable, satisfaction was high and the majority of patients in both groups preferred to give both verbal and written consent for genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

Mainstreamed genetic care provides sufficient information for the majority of breast cancer patients to decide about genetic testing with minimal distress.

Experience with a nurse-driven genetic counseling pathway of Italian women with uninformative BRCA test result

Several models of genetic counseling have been proposed to tackle the increasing volume of individuals requiring access to BRCA testing. Few data are available on patient experience and retention of information with nurse-driven genetic counseling. We evaluated the experience and retention of information in women with an uninformative BRCA test result and who were not considered at high risk due to their personal/family history of cancer who underwent geneticist-supervised nurse-driven genetic counseling and who received their test result by phone. Women who received an uninformative BRCA test result between May 2017 and September 2019 were administered a questionnaire exploring experience with genetic counseling and retention of information provided. Of 366 eligible women, 299 (273 breast cancer patients and 26 women without breast cancer) completed the interview. Overall, 280 women (93.6%) positively valued their experience with genetic counseling and 287 (96.0%) considered it helpful with 57.5% of them feeling reassured for themselves and their family. Information on the clinical implications of the test result was correctly retained and women acted accordingly. Overall, 252 women (87.8%) accurately reported their test result as normal/negative. Only 67 (22.4%) recognized that despite a normal BRCA test result, a low probability of a hereditary syndrome remains. Most women showed a poor ability to estimate cancer risk in BRCA mutation carriers and in the general population. Geneticist-supervised nurse-driven genetic counseling process for women with uninformative BRCA test result is associated with a positive patient experience and an adequate retention of information concerning the management of their personal and familial cancer risk. The design and implementation of nurse-driven genetic counseling models may contribute to efficient and timely access to BRCA genetic testing.

A Focused Clinical Review of Lynch Syndrome

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an autosomal dominant condition that increases an individual's risk of a constellation of cancers. LS is defined when an individual has inherited pathogenic variants in the mismatch repair genes. Currently, most people with LS are undiagnosed. Early detection of LS is vital as those with LS can be enrolled in cancer reduction strategies through chemoprophylaxis, risk reducing surgery and cancer surveillance. However, these interventions are often invasive and require refinement. Furthermore, not all LS associated cancers are currently amenable to surveillance. Historically only those with a strong family history suggestive of LS were offered testing; this has proved far too restrictive. New criteria for testing have recently been introduced including the universal screening for LS in associated cancers. This has increased the number of people being diagnosed with LS but has also brought about unique challenges such as when to consent for germline testing and questions over how and who should carry out the consent. The results of germline testing for LS can be complicated and the diagnostic pathway is not always clear. Furthermore, by testing only those with cancer for LS we fail to identify these individuals before they develop potentially fatal pathology. This review will outline these challenges and explore solutions. Furthermore, we consider the potential future of LS care and the related treatments and interventions which are the current focus of research.

Mainstream germline genetic testing in men with metastatic prostate cancer: design and protocol for a multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

In international guidelines, germline genetic testing is recommended for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Before undergoing germline genetic testing, these patients should receive pre-test counseling. In the standard genetic care pathway, pre-test counseling is provided by a healthcare professional of a genetics department. Because the number of patients with metastatic prostate cancer is large, the capacity in the genetics departments might be insufficient. Therefore, we aim to implement so-called mainstream genetic testing in the Netherlands for patients with metastatic prostate cancer. In a mainstream genetic testing pathway, non-genetic healthcare professionals discuss and order germline genetic testing. In our DISCOVER study, we will assess the experiences among patients and non-genetic healthcare professionals with this new pathway.

METHODS

A multicenter prospective observational cohort study will be conducted in 15 hospitals, in different regions of the Netherlands. We developed an online training module on genetics in prostate cancer and the counseling of patients. After completion of this module, non-genetic healthcare professionals will provide pre-test counseling and order germline genetic testing in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Both non-genetic healthcare professionals and patients receive three questionnaires. We will determine the experience with mainstream genetic testing, based on satisfaction and acceptability. Patients with a pathogenic germline variant will also be interviewed. We will determine the efficacy of the mainstreaming pathway, based on time investment for non-genetic healthcare professionals and the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants.

DISCUSSION

This study is intended to be one of the largest studies on mainstream genetic testing in prostate cancer. The results of this study can improve the mainstream genetic testing pathway in patients with prostate cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered in the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) under number NL9617.

Attitudes and training needs of oncologists and surgeons in mainstreaming breast cancer genetic counseling in a low-to-middle income Asian country

With the advent of poly-ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapies, the focus of genetic testing for breast, ovarian, and other cancers has shifted from risk management to treatment decision-making in high-resource settings. Due to the shortage of genetic counselors worldwide, alternative ways of delivering genetic counseling have been explored, including training nongenetics healthcare professionals (NGHPs) to provide genetic counseling. However, little is known about the feasibility of adopting such models in healthcare settings with insufficient specialists, where population health literacy is low and where access to new therapies may be limited. In this study, we evaluated the attitudes, considerations, and self-efficacy of oncologists, breast surgeons, and general surgeons in mainstreaming breast cancer genetic counseling in Malaysia, a middle-income Asian country with a universal healthcare system. We developed a 32-item survey via a modified Delphi method, which was then distributed via a purposive and network sampling approach. While 77% of respondents expressed interest in providing breast cancer genetic counseling, 85% preferred to refer patients directly to genetic services for genetic counseling and testing. The main considerations for mainstreaming were the cost of genetic testing and PARPi therapy, as well as the availability of support from genetics professionals. Respondents reported a lack of confidence in communicating genetic risk, particularly to patients with poor health literacy, and in the clinical management of patients with variants of uncertain significance. Our results highlight the urgent need to train more NGHPs in providing genetic counseling and testing in low-to-middle income countries, and suggest that the mainstay for genetic counseling in this setting may be for risk management rather than access to PARPi therapy.

The Feasibility of Implementing Mainstream Germline Genetic Testing in Routine Cancer Care-A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

Germline genetic testing for patients with cancer can have important implications for treatment, preventive options, and for family members. In a mainstream genetic testing pathway, pre-test counseling is performed by non-genetic healthcare professionals, thereby making genetic testing more accessible to all patients who might benefit from it. These mainstream genetic testing pathways are being implemented in different hospitals around the world, and for different cancer types. It is important to evaluate how a mainstream genetic testing pathway can be made sustainable and if quality of genetic care is maintained. We show in this systematic review that it is feasible to incorporate a mainstream genetic testing pathway into routine cancer care while maintaining quality of care. A training procedure for non-genetic healthcare professionals and a close collaboration between genetics and other clinical departments are highly recommended to ensure sustainability.

Abstract

Background: Non-genetic healthcare professionals can provide pre-test counseling and order germline genetic tests themselves, which is called mainstream genetic testing. In this systematic review, we determined whether mainstream genetic testing was feasible in daily practice while maintaining quality of genetic care. Methods: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychINFO were searched for articles describing mainstream genetic testing initiatives in cancer care. Results: Seventeen articles, reporting on 15 studies, met the inclusion criteria. Non-genetic healthcare professionals concluded that mainstream genetic testing was possible within the timeframe of a routine consultation. In 14 studies, non-genetic healthcare professionals completed some form of training about genetics. When referral was coordinated by a genetics team, the majority of patients carrying a pathogenic variant were seen for post-test counseling by genetic healthcare professionals. The number of days between cancer diagnosis and test result disclosure was always lower in the mainstream genetic testing pathway than in the standard genetic testing pathway (e.g., pre-test counseling at genetics department). Conclusions: Mainstream genetic testing seems feasible in daily practice with no insurmountable barriers. A structured pathway with a training procedure is desirable, as well as a close collaboration between genetics and other clinical departments.

Genetic and genomic learning needs of oncologists and oncology nurses in the era of precision medicine: a scoping review

Genetic and genomic data are increasingly guiding clinical care for cancer patients. To meet the growing demand for precision medicine, patient-facing oncology staff will be a part of leading the provision of genomic testing. A scoping review was undertaken to identify the range of genetic and genomic learning needs of oncologists and oncology nurses. Learning needs were reported relating to interpretation of genomic data, clinical decision-making, patient communication and counseling, and fundamentals of genetics and genomics. There was a lack of empirical research specific to oncology nurses and their learning needs in tumor sequencing. Our findings suggest that oncologists and oncology nurses need tailored support, education and training to improve their confidence and skills in adopting genomic testing into clinical practice.

Genetic testing in patients with triple-negative or hereditary breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years there has been a dramatic evolution in the clinical utility of genetic testing with expanding therapeutic implications for individuals with breast cancer who harbor a germline mutation in BRCA1/2. As these therapeutic opportunities expand and evolve, this requires the clinical and research community to rethink the approach to genetic testing for individuals with breast cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genetic testing is evolving from traditional testing models based on pretest counseling with the aim of identifying hereditary and individual risk for purposes of screening and risk reduction to contemporary models that utilize technology to improve accessibility and oncology led mainstreaming of testing where the oncologist refers for genetic testing, discloses the results and formal counseling occurs later in the process than in traditional models. The cost and accessibility to multigene panel testing have resulted in broad uptake despite the fact that clinical utility and appropriate interpretation of results are not yet well established. Furthermore, somatic testing for genomic alterations may also yield results beyond the disease with detection of germline mutations impacting the individual and their family more broadly than anticipated.

SUMMARY

With the establishment of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors as part of the treatment armamentarium for early and advanced breast cancer, paradigms, algorithms, and resources for genetic testing need to rapidly change in order to adapt to the evolution of germline mutations from hereditary and individual risk predictors to predictive therapeutic biomarkers.