"There should be one spot that you can go:" BRCA mutation carriers' perspectives on cancer risk management and a hereditary cancer registry

Individuals who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic variants are recommended to have extensive cancer prevention screening and risk-reducing surgeries. Uptake of these recommendations is variable, and there remains room for improvement in the risk management of BRCA carriers. This paper explores female BRCA carriers' experiences with the current model of care and their perspectives on (and interest in) an inherited cancer registry. Findings can inform the development of a dedicated high-risk screening and management program for these patients. Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered through a provincial descriptive survey and semi-structured qualitative interviews to assess BRCA carriers' opinions toward risk management services in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. Survey (n = 69) and interview data (n = 15) revealed continuity and coordination challenges with the current system of care of high-risk individuals. Respondents suggested an inherited cancer registry would help identify high-risk individuals and provide a centralized system of risk management for identified carriers. Respondents identified concerns about the privacy of their registry data, including who could access it. Findings suggest BRCA carriers see great value in an inherited cancer registry. Specifically, participants noted it could provide a centralized system to help improve the coordination of burdensome, life-long risk management. Important patient concerns about protecting their privacy and their health data confidentiality must be addressed in patient and public information and informed consent documents about a registry.

Factors influencing surgical treatment decisions for breast cancer: a qualitative exploration of surgeon and patient perspectives

Background

The rate of mastectomy is much higher in Newfoundland and Labrador than in any other province in Canada, even for women diagnosed at an early stage. In this paper, we present qualitative data from women who have made a decision for surgical treatment and from breast surgeons in an effort to better explicate factors influencing breast cancer (bca) surgical decision-making.

Methods

The study's descriptive, qualitative design involved holding interviews with breast surgeons and holding focus groups and interviews with women who were offered the choice of breast-conserving surgery (bcs) or mastectomy (mt).

Results

Participants included 35 women and 13 surgeons. High interest in mt and increasing requests for prophylactic contralateral mt were evident. A host of factors-clinical, demographic, psychosocial, education-related, and cultural-influenced the decisions. A key factor for women was fear of recurrence and a need to "just get rid of it," but the experiences of others also influenced the decisions. Life stage and family considerations also factored prominently into women's decisions.

Conclusions

Women with early-stage bca more often chose mt and often demanded prophylactic removal of the healthy breast. Findings highlight the importance of ensuring that women at average risk are appropriately counselled about the low likelihood of a subsequent contralateral bca and the lack of survival benefit associated with prophylactic contralateral mt. Findings also revealed other areas of presurgical discussion that might help women think through their personal circumstances and values so as to encourage informed surgical decisions.

Stakeholder attitudes towards the role and application of informed consent for newborn bloodspot screening: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) involves testing a small sample of blood taken from the heel of the newborn for a number of serious and life-limiting conditions. In Canada, newborn screening programmes fall under provincial and territorial jurisdiction with no federal coordination. To date, we know very little about the underlying beliefs around different consent practices or how terminology is interpreted by different individuals. Differences in attitudes may have important healthcare consequences. This study will provide empirical data comparing stakeholder opinions on their understanding of consent-related terminology, the perceived applicability of different consent approaches to newborn screening, and the requirements of these different approaches.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Parents, healthcare professionals and policymakers will be recruited in the provinces of Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador. Parents will be identified through records held by each provincial screening programme. Healthcare professionals will be purposively sampled on the basis of engagement with newborn screening. Within each province we will identify policymakers who have policy analysis or advisory responsibilities relating to NBS. Data collection will be by qualitative interviews. We will conduct 20 interviews with parents of young children, 10 interviews with key healthcare professionals across the range of appropriate specialties and 10 with policymakers at each site (40 per site, total, N=80). The examination of the transcripts will follow a thematic analysis approach. Recruitment started in June 2014 and is expected to be complete by June 2015.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study received ethics approval from the Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board, the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Ethics Board (both Ontario), and the Health Research Ethics Authority (Newfoundland and Labrador).

RESULTS

These will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The results will have specific application to the development of parent education materials for newborn screening.

Personalized medicine and genome-based treatments: Why personalized medicine ≠ individualized treatments

The sequencing of the human genome and decreasing costs of sequencing technology have led to the notion of ‘personalized medicine’. This has been taken by some authors to indicate that personalized medicine will provide individualized treatments solely based on one’s DNA sequence. We argue this is overly optimistic and misconstrues the notion of personalization. Such interpretations fail to account for economic, policy and structural constraints on the delivery of healthcare. Furthermore, notions of individualization based on genomic data potentially take us down the road of genetic reductionism obscuring the role of environmental factors in disease and ill health. We propose that one should see personalized medicine as a way of using personal genomic information to stratify individuals into subpopulations and suggest that personalized medicine be seen within a broader idea of personalized healthcare, reflecting healthcare that integrates personal genomic data into cultural, environmental and personal contexts.

Public attitudes towards genomic risk profiling as a component of routine population screening

Including low penetrance genomic variants in population-based screening might enable personalization of screening intensity and follow up. The application of genomics in this way requires formal evaluation. Even if clinically beneficial, uptake would still depend on the attitudes of target populations. We developed a deliberative workshop on two hypothetical applications (in colorectal cancer and newborn screening) in which we applied stepped, neutrally-framed, information sets. Data were collected using nonparticipant observation, free-text comments by individual participants, and a structured survey. Qualitative data were transcribed and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Eight workshops were conducted with 170 individuals (120 colorectal cancer screening and 50 newborn screening for type 1 diabetes). The use of information sets promoted informed deliberation. In both contexts, attitudes appeared to be heavily informed by assessments of the likely validity of the test results and its personal and health care utility. Perceived benefits included the potential for early intervention, prevention, and closer monitoring while concerns related to costs, education needs regarding the probabilistic nature of risk, the potential for worry, and control of access to personal genomic information. Differences between the colorectal cancer and newborn screening groups appeared to reflect different assessments of potential personal utility, particularly regarding prevention.

Family history tools in primary care: does one size fit all?

Family health history (FHH) has potential value in many health care settings. This review discusses the potential uses of FHH information in primary care and the need for tools to be designed accordingly. We developed a framework in which the attributes of FHH tools are mapped against these different purposes. It contains 7 attributes mapped against 5 purposes. In considering different FHH tool purposes, it is apparent that different attributes become more or less important, and that tools for different purposes require different implementation and evaluation strategies. The context in which a tool is used is also relevant to its effectiveness. For FHH tools, it is unlikely that 'one size fits all', although appreciation of different purposes, users and contexts should facilitate the development of different applications from single FHH platforms.

Attitude and knowledge about genetics and genetic testing

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of health care users may be confronted with new genetic knowledge and discoveries that offer new types of medical decision-making. How people use these new insights and make decisions about genetic risk depends, at least in part, on their knowledge and attitudes about human genetics.

METHODS

A postal survey administered to 560 women who had been offered prenatal screening in Ontario measured knowledge about, and attitudes toward, genetic testing and the uses of genetic information.

RESULTS

Respondents strongly supported the use of genetic information to improve disease diagnosis and to help understand disease causes; however, people also held a more critical attitude towards certain aspects of testing and genetic information. Relatively high levels of knowledge about genetics were also observed in this sample, although there were deficits in specific areas (e.g., transmission patterns).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite overall positive attitudes towards genetics, participants held more critical attitudes towards certain aspects of testing and the uses of genetic information. It would be unwise for genetics policy-makers and stakeholders to assume that a better-informed public would automatically be more supportive of all genetics research and new genetic discoveries.