Anticipatory anxiety and participation in cancer screening. A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesize current evidence on the association between anticipatory anxiety, defined as apprehension-specific negative affect that may be experienced when exposed to potential threat or uncertainty, and cancer screening to better inform strategies to maximize participation rates.

METHODS

Searches related to cancer screening and anxiety were conducted in seven electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL), with potentially eligible papers screened in Covidence. Data extraction was conducted independently by multiple authors. Barriers to cancer screening for any type of cancer and relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and intention were categorized and compared according to the form and target of anxiety and cancer types.

RESULTS

A total of 74 articles (nparticipants  = 119,990) were included, reporting 103 relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and 13 instances where anticipatory anxiety was reported as a barrier to screening. Anticipatory anxiety related to a possible cancer diagnosis was often associated with increased screening, while general anxiety showed no consistent relationship. Negative relationships were often found between anxiety about the screening procedure and cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Anticipatory anxiety about a cancer diagnosis may promote screening participation, whereas a fear of the screening procedure could be a barrier. Public health messaging and primary prevention practitioners should acknowledge the appropriate risk of cancer, while engendering screening confidence and highlighting the safety and comfort of screening tests.

In person and virtual process mapping experiences to capture and explore variability in clinical practice: application to genetic referral pathways across seven Australian hospital networks

Genetic referral for Lynch syndrome (LS) exemplifies complex clinical pathways. Identifying target behaviours (TBs) for change and associated barriers requires structured group consultation activities with busy clinicians - consolidating implementation activities whilst retaining rigour is crucial. This study aimed to: i) use process mapping to gain in-depth understandings of site-specific LS testing and referral practices in Australian hospitals and support identification of TBs for change, ii) explore if barriers to identified TBs could be identified through process mapping focus-group data, and iii) demonstrate pandemic-induced transition from in-person to virtual group interactive process mapping methods. LS clinical stakeholders attended interactive in-person or virtual focus groups to develop site-specific "process maps" visually representing referral pathways. Content analysis of transcriptions informed site-specific process maps, then clinical audit data was compared to highlight TBs for change. TBs were reviewed in follow-up focus groups. Secondary thematic analysis explored barriers to identified TBs, coded against the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The transition from in-person to pandemic-induced virtual group interactive process mapping methods was documented. Process mapping highlighted six key areas of clinical practice variation across sites and site-specific TBs for change were identified. Key barriers to identified TBs emerged, categorised to seven TDF domains. Process mapping revealed variations in clinical practices surrounding LS referral between sites. Incorporating qualitative perspectives enhances process mapping by facilitating identification of TBs for change and barriers, providing a pathway to developing targeted interventions. Virtual process mapping activities produced detailed data and enabled comprehensive map development.

Lynch syndrome testing of colorectal cancer patients in a high-income country with universal healthcare: a retrospective study of current practice and gaps in seven australian hospitals

BACKGROUND

To inform effective genomic medicine strategies, it is important to examine current approaches and gaps in well-established applications. Lynch syndrome (LS) causes 3-5% of colorectal cancers (CRCs). While guidelines commonly recommend LS tumour testing of all CRC patients, implementation in health systems is known to be highly variable. To provide insights on the heterogeneity in practice and current bottlenecks in a high-income country with universal healthcare, we characterise the approaches and gaps in LS testing and referral in seven Australian hospitals across three states.

METHODS

We obtained surgery, pathology, and genetics services data for 1,624 patients who underwent CRC resections from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2018 in the included hospitals.

RESULTS

Tumour testing approaches differed between hospitals, with 0-19% of patients missing mismatch repair deficiency test results (total 211/1,624 patients). Tumour tests to exclude somatic MLH1 loss were incomplete at five hospitals (42/187 patients). Of 74 patients with tumour tests completed appropriately and indicating high risk of LS, 36 (49%) were missing a record of referral to genetics services for diagnostic testing, with higher missingness for older patients (0% of patients aged ≤ 40 years, 76% of patients aged > 70 years). Of 38 patients with high-risk tumour test results and genetics services referral, diagnostic testing was carried out for 25 (89%) and identified a LS pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant for 11 patients (44% of 25; 0.7% of 1,624 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the LS testing and referral gaps, further work is needed to identify strategies for successful integration of LS testing into clinical care, and provide a model for hereditary cancers and broader genomic medicine. Standardised reporting may help clinicians interpret tumour test results and initiate further actions.

Professional regulation for Australasian genetic counselors

As a result of the ongoing global expansion of genetic counseling, the need to formalize a system of professional regulation for genetic counselors was identified in Australasia. In June 2017, under the auspices of the Human Genetics Society of Australasia (HGSA), a working party was convened. The purpose of the working party was to provide strategic leadership for the profession of Australasian genetic counselors with a goal to formalize a national regulatory framework for genetic counselors across both Australian and New Zealand jurisdictions. This was ultimately achieved in Australia through full membership with the National Alliance of Self-Regulating Health Professions (NASRHP) while the profession of genetic counseling in New Zealand is utilizing this framework to establish their regulation pathway. Regulation has a number of implications for genetic counselors, their employers, and the wider community, with the primary purpose of regulation being protection of the public from harm. This paper details the process of formalizing self-regulation for genetic counselors in Australasia, by defining professional regulation; outlining the purpose of regulation and the status of regulation for genetic counselors in Australasia and internationally, as well as health professionals more broadly; exploring the challenges of establishing regulation in Australasia; and the next steps for regulation in Australasia. Through detailing this process, the intention is to provide a framework to support genetic counseling colleagues internationally as well as other health professions in Australasia to explore and achieve regulation through their respective jurisdiction.

The development and evaluation of a nationwide training program for oncology health professionals in the provision of genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients

BACKGROUND

BRCA1/2 mutation status has increasing relevance for ovarian cancer treatments, making traditional coordination of genetic testing by genetic services unsustainable. Consequently alternative models of genetic testing have been developed to improve testing at the initial diagnosis for all eligible women.

METHODS

A training module to enable mainstreamed genetic testing by oncology healthcare professionals was developed by genetic health professionals. Oncology healthcare professionals completed questionnaires before and 12 months post-training to assess perceived skills, competence and barriers to their coordinating genetic testing for women with high-grade non-mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer. Genetic health professionals were surveyed 12 months post-training to assess perceived barriers to implementation of mainstreaming.

RESULTS

185 oncology healthcare professionals were trained in 42 workshops at 35 Australasian hospitals. Of the 273 tests ordered by oncology healthcare professionals post-training, 241 (93.1%) met national testing guidelines. The number of tests ordered by genetic health professionals reduced significantly (z = 45.0, p = 0.008). Oncology healthcare professionals' perceived barriers to mainstreamed testing decreased from baseline to follow-up (t = 2.39, p = 0.023), particularly perceived skills, knowledge and attitudes. However, only 58% reported either 'always' or 'nearly always' having ordered BRCA testing for eligible patients at 12 months, suggesting oncology healthcare professionals' perceived barriers were not systematically addressed through training.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncology healthcare professionals have demonstrated a willingness to be involved in the provision of genetic testing in a mainstreaming model. If oncology services are to hold responsibility for coordinating genetic testing, their readiness will require understanding of barriers not addressed by training alone to inform future intervention design.

Peritumoral granulomatous reaction in endometrial carcinoma: association with DNA mismatch repair protein deficiency, particularly loss of PMS2 expression

AIMS

The observation of peritumoral granulomatous reactions (PGRs) in two endometrial carcinomas (ECs) with a PMS2-deficient/MLH1-intact expression pattern led us to investigate whether PGRs in EC were specifically associated with DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein deficiency, particularly PMS2 loss.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Hysterectomy specimens from 22 MMR protein-intact and 54 MMR protein-deficient ECs were reviewed with specific attention to the presence of a PGR and a tumour-associated lymphoid reaction [including tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and stromal lymphoid infiltrates]. The MMR protein-deficient ECs included 22 cases with combined MLH1/PMS2 loss, 11 with combined MSH2/MSH6 loss, 11 with isolated MSH6 loss, and 10 with PMS2 loss but intact MLH1 staining (including the two 'index' cases). Overall, PGRs were identified in seven of 54 (13%) MMR protein-deficient ECs, five of which showed a PMS2-deficient/MLH1-intact immunophenotype; three of these patients had germline PMS2 mutations and one additional patient had a germline MSH6 mutation. None of the MMR protein-intact tumours showed a PGR. Although five of the seven PGR-positive ECs had a high-grade histological component, six were stage I. Most ECs with PGRs also showed TILs and stromal lymphoid reactions, similarly to MMR protein-deficient ECs in general.

CONCLUSIONS

MMR protein-deficient ECs, particularly those with PMS2 loss, occasionally show PGRs in addition to stromal lymphoid infiltrates and TILs. Therefore, PGRs could be considered to constitute a histological prompt for consideration of Lynch syndrome. The potential prognostic significance of PGRs in EC requires further study.

Clinical and mutational spectrum of neurofibromatosis type 1-like syndrome

CONTEXT

Autosomal dominant inactivating sprouty-related EVH1 domain-containing protein 1 (SPRED1) mutations have recently been described in individuals presenting mainly with café au lait macules (CALMs), axillary freckling, and macrocephaly. The extent of the clinical spectrum of this new disorder needs further delineation.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency, mutational spectrum, and phenotype of neurofibromatosis type 1-like syndrome (NFLS) in a large cohort of patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In a cross-sectional study, 23 unrelated probands carrying a SPRED1 mutation identified through clinical testing participated with their families in a genotype-phenotype study (2007-2008). In a second cross-sectional study, 1318 unrelated anonymous samples collected in 2003-2007 from patients with a broad range of signs typically found in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) but no detectable NF1 germline mutation underwent SPRED1 mutation analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparison of aggregated clinical features in patients with or without a SPRED1 or NF1 mutation. Functional assays were used to evaluate the pathogenicity of missense mutations.

RESULTS

Among 42 SPRED1-positive individuals from the clinical cohort, 20 (48%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 32%-64%) fulfilled National Institutes of Health (NIH) NF1 diagnostic criteria based on the presence of more than 5 CALMs with or without freckling or an NF1-compatible family history. None of the 42 SPRED1-positive individuals (0%; 95% CI, 0%-7%) had discrete cutaneous or plexiform neurofibromas, typical NF1 osseous lesions, or symptomatic optic pathway gliomas. In the anonymous cohort of 1318 individuals, 34 different SPRED1 mutations in 43 probands were identified: 27 pathogenic mutations in 34 probands and 7 probable nonpathogenic missense mutations in 9 probands. Of 94 probands with familial CALMs with or without freckling and no other NF1 features, 69 (73%; 95% CI, 63%-80%) had an NF1 mutation and 18 (19%; 95% CI, 12%-29%) had a pathogenic SPRED1 mutation. In the anonymous cohort, 1.9% (95% CI, 1.2%-2.9%) of individuals with the clinical diagnosis of NF1 according to the NIH criteria had NFLS.

CONCLUSIONS

A high SPRED1 mutation detection rate was found in NF1 mutation-negative families with an autosomal dominant phenotype of CALMs with or without freckling and no other NF1 features. Among individuals in this study, NFLS was not associated with the peripheral and central nervous system tumors seen in NF1.

Quality and safety of genetic testing in Australia and New Zealand: a review of the current regulatory framework

This paper provides an overview of the regulation of quality assurance for genetic testing in Australia and New Zealand and outlines the steps currently being taken to critically appraise and improve the regulatory framework in each country. It aims to contextualize this framework within the broader context of quality and patient safety concerns; and to draw together the concerns and recommendations of the various organizations that have been working to improve quality assurance in this area.