An investigation of genetic counselors' testing recommendations: pedigree analysis and the use of multiplex breast cancer panel testing

The impact of genetic counselor involvement in genetic and genomic test order review: A scoping review

PURPOSE

The increasing complexity of genetic technologies paired with more genetic tests being ordered by nongenetic health care providers, has resulted in an increase in the number of inappropriately ordered tests. Genetic counselors (GCs) are ideally suited to assess the appropriateness of a genetic test.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of GC involvement in utilization management initiatives in order to describe the impact of having GCs involved in this process. Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, EBM reviews, and Web of Science Core Collection) and gray literature were searched. We considered literature published in English since 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 51 studies were included. The most commonly evaluated outcomes included cancellation rate, economic efficiencies, impact on medical management, diagnostic rate, and time or triage efficiencies. Several studies also described GC impact on nongenetic health care providers.

CONCLUSION

Employment of GCs in the laboratory has been implemented widely as a solution to test misordering. These studies describe ways in which GCs can be integrated into testing workflows to reduce the number of inappropriate tests and have wider impacts on nongenetic health care providers' ordering practices and the patient experience.

Systematic evidence review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with cancer genetic counseling

PURPOSE

Genetic counseling (GC) is standard of care in genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). A rigorous assessment of the data reported from published studies is crucial to ensure the evidence-based implementation of GC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 patient-reported and health-services-related outcomes associated with pre- and post-test GC in GCRA in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of 5393 screened articles met inclusion criteria. No articles reporting post-test GC outcomes met inclusion criteria. For patient-reported outcomes, pre-test GC significantly decreased worry, increased knowledge, and decreased perceived risk but did not significantly affect patient anxiety, depression, decisional conflict, satisfaction, or intent to pursue genetic testing. For health-services outcomes, pre-test GC increased correct genetic test ordering, reduced inappropriate services, increased spousal support for genetic testing, and expedited care delivery but did not consistently improve cancer prevention behaviors nor lead to accurate risk assessment. The GRADE certainty in the evidence was very low or low. No included studies elucidated GC effect on mortality, cascade testing, cost-effectiveness, care coordination, shared decision making, or patient time burden.

CONCLUSION

The true impact of GC on relevant outcomes is not known low quality or absent evidence. Although a meta-analysis found that pre-test GC had beneficial effects on knowledge, worry, and risk perception, the certainty of this evidence was low according to GRADE methodology. Further studies are needed to support the evidence-based application of GC in GCRA.

A narrative overview of the patients' outcomes after multigene cancer panel testing, and a thorough evaluation of its implications for genetic counselling

Massively parallel sequencing is being implemented in clinical practice through the use of multigene panel testing, whole exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing. In this manuscript we explore how the use of massively parallel sequencing, and in particular multigene cancer panel testing, is potentially changing the process of genetic counselling and how patients cope with pre-test genetic counselling and results. We found that the main challenges are around uncertainty, hopes and expectations and the amount and complexity of information that needs to be discussed. This may impact the process of genetic counselling, although genetic counsellors can still use their core skills and enhance some of them in order to evolve and meet patients' needs in the genomics era. Available data suggests that patients can cope with multigene cancer panels although more research is needed to fully understand the psychosocial implications of multigene cancer panels for patients, especially for those who have variants of unknown significance or moderate penetrance variants. Research is also needed to explore and develop communication models that maximize patients' understanding and empower them to make informed decisions.

Linking genes to neurological clinical practice: the genomic basis for neurorehabilitation

Large-scale genomics projects such as the Human Genome Project and the International HapMap Project promise significant advances in the ability to diagnose and treat many conditions, including those with a neurological basis. A major focus of research has emerged in the neurological sciences to elucidate the molecular and genetic basis of various neurological diseases. Indeed, genetic factors are implicated in susceptibility for many neurological disorders, with family history studies providing strong evidence of familial risk for conditions such as stroke, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and Huntington's diseases. Heritability studies also suggest a strong genetic contribution to the risk for neurological diseases. Genome-wide association studies are also uncovering novel genetic variants associated with neurological disorders. Whole-genome and exome sequencing are likely to provide novel insights into the genetic basis of neurological disorders. Genetic factors are similarly associated with clinical phenotypes such as symptom severity and progression as well as response to treatment. Specifically, disease progression and functional restoration depend, in part, on the capacity for neural plasticity within residual neural tissues. Furthermore, such plasticity may be influenced in part by the presence of polymorphisms in several genes known to orchestrate neural plasticity including brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and Apolipoprotein E. (APOE). It is important for neurorehabilitation therapist practicing in the "genomic era" to be aware of the potential influence of genetic factors during clinical encounters, as advances in molecular sciences are revealing information of critical relevance to the clinical rehabilitation management of individuals with neurological conditions. Video Abstract available (See Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A88) for more insights from the authors.

Patient feedback and early outcome data with a novel tiered-binned model for multiplex breast cancer susceptibility testing

PURPOSE

The risks, benefits, and utilities of multiplex panels for breast cancer susceptibility are unknown, and new counseling and informed consent models are needed. We sought to obtain patient feedback and early outcome data with a novel tiered-binned model for multiplex testing.

METHODS

BRCA1/2-negative and untested patients completed pre- and posttest counseling and surveys evaluating testing experiences and cognitive and affective responses to multiplex testing.

RESULTS

Of 73 patients, 49 (67%) completed pretest counseling. BRCA1/2-negative patients were more likely to proceed with multiplex testing (86%) than those untested for BRCA1/2 (43%; P < 0.01). Many patients declining testing reported concern for uncertainty and distress. Most patients would not change anything about their pre- (76%) or posttest (89%) counseling sessions. Thirty-three patients (72%) were classified as making an informed choice, including 81% of those who proceeded with multiplex testing. Knowledge increased significantly. Anxiety, depression, uncertainty, and cancer worry did not significantly increase with multiplex testing.

CONCLUSION

Some patients, particularly those without prior BRCA1/2 testing, decline multiplex testing. Most patients who proceeded with testing did not experience negative psychological responses, but larger studies are needed. The tiered-binned approach is an innovative genetic counseling and informed consent model for further study in the era of multiplex testing.Genet Med 18 1, 25-33.

Development of a tiered and binned genetic counseling model for informed consent in the era of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility

PURPOSE

Multiplex genetic testing, including both moderate- and high-penetrance genes for cancer susceptibility, is associated with greater uncertainty than traditional testing, presenting challenges to informed consent and genetic counseling. We sought to develop a new model for informed consent and genetic counseling for four ongoing studies.

METHODS

Drawing from professional guidelines, literature, conceptual frameworks, and clinical experience, a multidisciplinary group developed a tiered-binned genetic counseling approach proposed to facilitate informed consent and improve outcomes of cancer susceptibility multiplex testing.

RESULTS

In this model, tier 1 "indispensable" information is presented to all patients. More specific tier 2 information is provided to support variable informational needs among diverse patient populations. Clinically relevant information is "binned" into groups to minimize information overload, support informed decision making, and facilitate adaptive responses to testing. Seven essential elements of informed consent are provided to address the unique limitations, risks, and uncertainties of multiplex testing.

CONCLUSION

A tiered-binned model for informed consent and genetic counseling has the potential to address the challenges of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility and to support informed decision making and adaptive responses to testing. Future prospective studies including patient-reported outcomes are needed to inform how to best incorporate multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility into clinical practice.Genet Med 17 6, 485-492.