Migrant breast cancer patients and their participation in genetic counseling: results from a registry-based study

Evidence-based advancements in breast cancer genetic counseling: a review

PURPOSE

Understanding individuals at high risk of breast cancer, as well as patients and survivors, underscores the critical role of genetic counseling in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

METHODS

This systematic review adhered to the guidelines outlined in the Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The review process was managed using Covidence systematic review software, facilitating data extraction according to predefined eligibility criteria by two independent reviewers. Quality appraisal and narrative synthesis were conducted following data extraction.

RESULTS

Out of 1089 articles screened, nineteen (19) studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. These studies were categorized into categories based on their relevance to breast cancer genetic counseling. Rapid Genetic Counseling and Testing (RGCT): 3 studies (15.78%), racial differences: 2 studies (10.52%), limited health literacy: 4 studies (21.05%), breast cancer survivorship: 3 studies (15.78%), risk perceptions and cancer worry: 5 studies (26.31%) and telephone delivery and computer aid programs: 2 studies (10.52%) based on specific focus areas of each study in relation to breast cancer genetic counseling.

CONCLUSION

Genetic counseling has shown to improve client outcomes across the majority of reviewed studies, contributing to the advancement of evidence-based practice in this field. However, to further promote evidence-based advancements in breast cancer genetic counseling, it is imperative to pay close attention to potential sources of bias and uphold rigorous quality standards in future research endeavors.

EBCC-14 manifesto: Addressing disparities in access to innovation for patients with metastatic breast cancer across Europe

The European Breast Cancer Council (EBCC) traditionally identifies controversies or major deficiencies in the management of patients with breast cancer and selects a multidisciplinary expert team to collaborate in setting crucial principles and recommendations to improve breast cancer care. The 2024 EBCC manifesto focuses on disparities in the care of patients with metastatic breast cancer. There are several reasons for existing disparities both between and within countries. Our recommendations aim to address the stigma of metastatic disease, which has led to significant disparities in access to innovative care regardless of the gross national income of a country. These recommendations are for different stakeholders to promote the care of patients with metastatic breast cancer across Europe and worldwide.

The effect of attendance in the Dutch breast cancer screening program on breast tumor characteristics among migrant women

BACKGROUND

In general, migrant women have a lower breast cancer (BC) incidence rate and higher BC mortality than autochthonous women. Further, migrant women show lower participation in the national BC screening program. To further investigate those aspects, we aimed to determine differences in incidence and tumor characteristics between autochthonous and migrant BC patients in Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

METHODS

We selected women diagnosed with BC in Rotterdam during 2012-2015 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Incidence rates were calculated by migrant status (i.e., women with or without migration background). Multivariable analyses revealed adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on the association between migration status and patient and tumor characteristics, additionally stratified by screening attendance (yes/no).

RESULTS

In total 1372 autochthonous and 450 migrant BC patients were included for analysis. BC incidence was lower among migrants than among autochthonous women. Overall, migrant women were younger at BC diagnosis (53 vs. 64 years, p < 0.001), and had higher risks of positive lymph nodes (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.33-2.33) and high grade tumors (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04-1.75). Especially non-screened migrant women had higher risk of positive nodes (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.43-5.21). Among the subgroup of screened women, we observed no significant differences between migrant and autochthonous patients.

CONCLUSION

Migrant women have lower BC incidence than autochthonous women, but diagnosis was more often at younger age and with unfavorable tumor characteristics. Attending the screening program strongly reduces the latter. Therefore, promotion of participation in the screening program is recommended.

Surgical Oncologists and Nurses in Breast Cancer Care are Ready to Provide Pre-Test Genetic Counseling

BACKGROUND

Pre-test genetic counseling for patients with breast cancer is increasingly being provided by nongenetic healthcare professionals. We evaluated the attitudes, knowledge, and self-efficacy of surgeons, oncologists, and nurses regarding mainstream genetic testing and the feasibility to incorporate pre-test genetic counseling into routine care.

METHODS

We offered an online training to healthcare professionals from 13 hospitals and implemented a mainstream genetic testing pathway in 11/13 (85%) hospitals. Questionnaires were sent before (T0) and 6 months after (T1) completing the training. Those who did not complete the training received a questionnaire to assess their motivations.

RESULTS

In 11 hospitals, 80 (65%) healthcare professionals completed the training, of whom 70 (88%) completed both questionnaires. The attitudes, (perceived) knowledge and self-efficacy of healthcare professionals were high both at baseline and 6 months after completing the training. After 6 months, their perceived knowledge about the advantages and disadvantages of a genetic test and implications for family members had significantly improved (p = 0.012 and p = 0.021, respectively). For the majority (89%), the time investment for pre-test genetic counseling was less than 15 min per patient and as expected or better. Healthcare professionals considered the total time investment feasible to incorporate mainstream genetic testing into their daily practice. The main barrier to complete the training was lack of time. The online training was considered useful, with a rating of 8/10.

CONCLUSION

Surgical oncologists and nurses in breast cancer care feel well-equipped and motivated to provide pre-test genetic counseling after completion of an online training module.

Development of a plain-language guide for discussing breast cancer genetic counseling and testing with patients with limited health literacy

PURPOSE

Due to limited health literacy and resulting ineffective communication between healthcare professionals and patients, not all eligible patients are offered breast cancer genetic counseling and testing. We aimed to develop a plain-language guide to increase effective communication about genetic counseling and testing with breast cancer patients with limited health literacy.

METHODS

Together with oncological healthcare professionals, we drafted a list of jargon words frequently used during (breast) cancer genetic counseling. In a focus group interview with breast cancer counselees with limited health literacy, who had received genetic counseling before, we reformulated these words in plain language. Low-literate individuals, who are not familiar with breast cancer care or genetic counseling, reflected on the draft of the guide. Completeness, acceptability, and perceived usability were tested in an online questionnaire among healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

The result is a plain-language guide for genetic counseling and testing with 33 frequently used jargon words and a reformulation of these words in plain language. Acceptability and perceived usefulness of the guide among healthcare professionals (n = 58) were high.

CONCLUSION

The plain-language guide provides opportunities to facilitate communication about genetic counseling and testing with patients with limited health literacy and could enhance opportunities for patients to make informed decisions to participate in genetic testing. As the intention from healthcare professionals to use the plain-language guide is high, implementation of the guide in a real-life setting seems promising.

Systematic development of a training program for healthcare professionals to improve communication about breast cancer genetic counseling with low health literate patients

There is a disproportionate underuse of genetic testing in breast cancer patients from lower education or migrant background. Within these groups, communication about referral to genetic counseling appears challenging due to limited health literacy and cultural barriers. Our aim was to develop and evaluate a training program for healthcare professionals (breast surgeons and specialized nurses), to increase effective communication. We systematically developed a blended training program based on patients’ and healthcare professionals’ needs and preferences. Prior to the training, we assessed awareness, knowledge and self-efficacy of healthcare professionals. Acceptability and usefulness of the training program were assessed directly after the training. Healthcare professionals (n = 65) from 17 hospitals showed moderate to high awareness and knowledge about the prevalence and impact of limited health literacy. They were aware of cultural factors that influence communication. However, they did not feel confident in recognizing limited health literacy and their self-efficacy to communicate effectively with these patients was low. The training program was rated as acceptable and useful. Healthcare professionals lack confidence to effectively communicate with patients with limited health literacy or migrant background. The training program offers opportunities to improve communication about referral to breast cancer genetic counseling.

Effect of a health literacy training program for surgical oncologists and specialized nurses on disparities in referral to breast cancer genetic testing

Background

There is an underuse of genetic testing in breast cancer patients with a lower level of education, limited health literacy or a migrant background. We aimed to study the effect of a health literacy training program for surgical oncologists and specialized nurses on disparities in referral to genetic testing.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter study in a quasi-experimental pre-post (intervention) design. The intervention consisted of an online module and a group training for surgical oncologists and specialized nurses in three regions in the Netherlands. Six months pre- and 12 months post intervention, clinical geneticists completed a checklist with socio-demographic characteristics including the level of health literacy of each referred patient. We conducted univariate and logistic regression analysis to evaluate the effect of the training program on disparities in referral to genetic testing.

Results

In total, 3179 checklists were completed, of which 1695 were from hospital referrals. No significant differences were found in educational level, level of health literacy and migrant background of patients referred for genetic testing by healthcare professionals working in trained hospitals before (n = 795) and after (n = 409) the intervention. The mean age of patients referred by healthcare professionals from trained hospitals was significantly lower after the intervention (52.0 vs. 49.8, P = 0.003).

Conclusion

The results of our study suggest that the health literacy training program did not decrease disparities in referral to genetic testing. Future research in a more controlled design is needed to better understand how socio-demographic factors influence referral to breast cancer genetic testing and what other factors might contribute.

•

Study on the effect of a health literacy training on access to breast cancer genetic testing.

•

Background characteristics of breast cancer patients pre- and post-intervention are compared.

•

Mean age of patients referred by trained hospitals was significantly lower after intervention.

•

The health literacy training did not decrease disparities in referral to genetic testing.

Referral to cancer genetic counseling: do migrant status and patients' educational background matter?

Participation rates in cancer genetic counseling differ among populations, as patients with a lower educational background and migrant patients seem to have poorer access to it. We conducted a study to determine the present-day educational level and migrant status of counselees referred to cancer genetic counseling. We assessed personal characteristics and demographics of 731 newly referred counselees. Descriptive statistics were used to describe these characteristics. The results show that about 40% of the counselees had a high educational level and 89% were Dutch natives. Compared to the Dutch population, we found a significant difference in educational level (p = < 0.01) and migrant status (p = < 0.001). This suggests disparities in cancer genetic counseling and as a result of that, suboptimal care for vulnerable groups. Limited health literacy is likely to pose a particular challenge to cancer genetic counseling for counselees with a lower education or a migrant background. Our study points to considerable scope for improvement in referring vulnerable groups of patients for cancer genetic counseling.

Breast cancer genetic counseling among Dutch patients from Turkish and Moroccan descent: participation determinants and perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals

Lower participation rates in cancer genetic counseling are observed among different ethnic minorities. The goal of our study is to gain insight into determinants of Turkish and Moroccan patients’ participation in breast cancer genetic counseling and DNA testing, from the point of view of healthcare professionals and patients. Questionnaire-based telephone interviews about awareness, perceptions, and reasons for (non-) participation in cancer genetic counseling were conducted with 78 Dutch breast cancer patients from Turkish and Moroccan descent. The interviews were held in Arabic, Berber, Turkish, or Dutch by bilingual research assistants. Additionally, 14 breast cancer patients participated in one of two focus group meetings, and two focus groups were held with 11 healthcare professionals. SPSS and QSR Nvivo were used to examine the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Half of the total group of patients (N = 78) and 79% of patients eligible for genetic counseling and testing (N = 33) were aware of the possibility of genetic counseling. The most important determinants for nonparticipation in genetic counseling were experienced difficulties in patient-doctor communication, cultural factors (e.g., social norms), limited health literacy, limited knowledge of the family cancer history, and anxiety about cancer. Religious beliefs and knowing personal and family members’ breast cancer risks were motives to obtain genetic counseling. Despite the fact that our study showed that Moroccan and Turkish women reported several personal motives to obtain genetic counseling and testing (GCT), patients and healthcare professionals experience significant language and health literacy difficulties, which make it harder to fully access health care such as genetic counseling and testing.