1
|
Cragun DL, Hunt PP, Dean M, Weidner A, Shields AK, Tezak A, Pal T. Applying the framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions to increase family communication about hereditary cancer. PEC INNOVATION 2023; 2:100133. [PMID: 37214492 PMCID: PMC10194404 DOI: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2023.100133] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2022] [Revised: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Objective Evaluate an intervention to increase family communication (FC) of positive hereditary cancer test results using the Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions (FDECI). Methods We developed 'programme theory' during the FDECI development phase by aligning intervention components with behavior change techniques (BCTs) and theoretical factors expected to improve FC. During the feasibility phase, we obtained feedback from 12 stakeholder interviews. Results Intervention components aligned with a total of 14 unique BCTs for which prior evidence links the BCT to theoretical factors that influence behavior change. Constructive stakeholder feedback included: more information desired, rewording to support autonomy by highlighting options, and improvements to navigation, visuals, and audio. Positive comments included: comprehensiveness of materials, modeling of conversations, and usefulness of the materials for helping a person prepare to share positive test results. Conclusion The first FDECI phases were helpful for improving the intervention and planning our ongoing effectiveness and future implementation phases. Innovation Our application of the FDECI is novel, including plans to test our 'programme theory' using coincidence analysis (CNA) to determine who accesses which intervention materials, how utilizing certain materials impact the aligned theoretical factors, and whether these in turn make a difference in the behavioral outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah L. Cragun
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Paige Phillips Hunt
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Marleah Dean
- University of South Florida, Department of Communication, Tampa, FL; Health Outcomes & Behavior Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States of America
- Moffitt Cancer Center, Health Outcomes & Behavior Program, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Anne Weidner
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Andrea K. Shields
- University of South Florida, College of Public Health, Tampa, FL, United States of America
| | - Ann Tezak
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| | - Tuya Pal
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schmidlen TJ, Bristow SL, Hatchell KE, Esplin ED, Nussbaum RL, Haverfield EV. The Impact of Proband Indication for Genetic Testing on the Uptake of Cascade Testing Among Relatives. Front Genet 2022; 13:867226. [PMID: 35783293 PMCID: PMC9243226 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.867226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 05/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Although multiple factors can influence the uptake of cascade genetic testing, the impact of proband indication has not been studied. We performed a retrospective, cross-sectional study comparing cascade genetic testing rates among relatives of probands who received either diagnostic germline testing or non-indication-based proactive screening via next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based multigene panels for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS) and/or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The proportion of probands with a medically actionable (positive) finding were calculated based on genes associated with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 conditions, HCS genes, and FH genes. Among probands with a positive finding, cascade testing rates and influencing factors were assessed. A total of 270,715 probands were eligible for inclusion in the study (diagnostic n = 254,281,93.9%; proactive n = 16,434, 6.1%). A positive result in a gene associated with a CDC Tier 1 condition was identified in 10,520 diagnostic probands (4.1%) and 337 proactive probands (2.1%), leading to cascade testing among families of 3,305 diagnostic probands (31.4%) and 36 proactive probands (10.7%) (p < 0.0001). A positive result in an HCS gene was returned to 23,272 diagnostic probands (9.4%) and 970 proactive probands (6.1%), leading to cascade testing among families of 6,611 diagnostic probands (28.4%) and 89 proactive probands (9.2%) (p < 0.0001). Cascade testing due to a positive result in an HCS gene was more commonly pursued when the diagnostic proband was White, had a finding in a gene associated with a CDC Tier 1 condition, or had a personal history of cancer, or when the proactive proband was female. A positive result in an FH gene was returned to 1,647 diagnostic probands (25.3%) and 67 proactive probands (0.62%), leading to cascade testing among families of 360 diagnostic probands (21.9%) and 4 proactive probands (6.0%) (p < 0.01). Consistently higher rates of cascade testing among families of diagnostic probands may be due to a perceived urgency because of personal or family history of disease. Due to the proven clinical benefit of cascade testing, further research on obstacles to systematic implementation and uptake of testing for relatives of any proband with a medically actionable variant is warranted.
Collapse
|
3
|
Brédart A, Kop JL, De Pauw A, Cano A, Dick J, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Dolbeault S. Préoccupations et besoins d’aide psychologiques chez les femmes à risque génétique de cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire : une étude prospective observationnelle en Allemagne, Espagne et France. PSYCHO-ONCOLOGIE 2022. [DOI: 10.3166/pson-2021-0169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
Objectifs et contexte : L’arrivée des tests de panel de gènes a augmenté la complexité de la communication en consultation d’oncogénétique. Une attention quant à l’impact de cette communication sur les préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique s’avère d’autant plus indispensable. Cette étude vise à en quantifier le type et l’ampleur, avant et après la communication du résultat de test génétique, chez des femmes s’adressant à la consultation d’oncogénétique pour réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire en Allemagne, Espagne et France.
Participants et mesures : Parmi les 752 personnes invitées consécutivement à participer à cette étude, 646 (86 %) ― dont 510 (68 %) atteintes d’un cancer du sein―ont répondu à un questionnaire (PAHC (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer)) portant d’une part sur les préoccupations spécifiques à la démarche en oncogénétique et d’autre part sur leurs besoins d’aide psychologique ; questionnaire proposé après la consultation initiale d’oncogénétique initiale (T1) et, pour 460 (61 %) d’entre elles, deux mois après la communication du résultat du test (T2).
Résultats : Soixante-dix-neuf (17,2 %), 19 (4,1 %), 259 (56,3 %), 44 (9,6 %), 59 (12,8 %) femmes ont reçu respectivement les résultats suivants : un variant pathogène sur BRCA1/2 ou sur autre gène à risque élevé ou modéré, un résultat négatif non informatif, un résultat négatif vrai, ou la présence d’un variant dont la signification clinique est incertaine (VUS). Le type de préoccupations et les besoins d’aide psychologique se sont révélés variables selon les pays. Cependant, globalement, les préoccupations les plus fréquentes (> 70 %) étaient relatives à la perte d’un proche familial par cancer, et les moins fréquentes (< 5 %) relatives au soutien des proches. La plupart de ces préoccupations persistent deux mois plus tard, à la suite du résultat de test génétique. En revanche, le besoin d’aide psychologique a globalement diminué sur le plan statistique, excepté, selon le pays, pour les préoccupations familiales/sociales, les difficultés émotionnelles ou les aspects pratiques.
Conclusions : Dans notre étude portant sur des femmes issues de trois pays européens s’adressant à la consultation oncogénétique en vue de réaliser un test de susceptibilité au cancer du sein ou de l’ovaire, la plupart des préoccupations liées à la situation génétique persistent deux mois après la communication du résultat de test, et les besoins d’aide psychologique se manifestent surtout dans le champ des relations et des émotions.
Collapse
|
4
|
Kim S, Aceti M, Baroutsou V, Bürki N, Caiata-Zufferey M, Cattaneo M, Chappuis PO, Ciorba FM, Graffeo-Galbiati R, Heinzelmann-Schwarz V, Jeong J, Jung MM, Kim SW, Kim J, Lim MC, Ming C, Monnerat C, Park HS, Park SH, Pedrazzani CA, Rabaglio M, Ryu JM, Saccilotto R, Wieser S, Zürrer-Härdi U, Katapodi MC. Using a Tailored Digital Health Intervention for Family Communication and Cascade Genetic Testing in Swiss and Korean Families With Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Protocol for the DIALOGUE Study. JMIR Res Protoc 2021; 10:e26264. [PMID: 34114954 PMCID: PMC8235289 DOI: 10.2196/26264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2020] [Revised: 02/09/2021] [Accepted: 02/25/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background In hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), family communication of genetic test results is essential for cascade genetic screening, that is, identifying and testing blood relatives of known mutation carriers to determine whether they also carry the pathogenic variant, and to propose preventive and clinical management options. However, up to 50% of blood relatives are unaware of relevant genetic information, suggesting that potential benefits of genetic testing are not communicated effectively within family networks. Technology can facilitate communication and genetic education within HBOC families. Objective The aims of this study are to develop the K-CASCADE (Korean–Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) cohort in Korea by expanding an infrastructure developed by the CASCADE (Cancer Predisposition Cascade Genetic Testing) Consortium in Switzerland; develop a digital health intervention to support the communication of cancer predisposition for Swiss and Korean HBOC families, based on linguistic and cultural adaptation of the Family Gene Toolkit; evaluate its efficacy on primary (family communication of genetic results and cascade testing) and secondary (psychological distress, genetic literacy, active coping, and decision making) outcomes; and explore its translatability using the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance framework. Methods The digital health intervention will be available in French, German, Italian, Korean, and English and can be accessed via the web, mobile phone, or tablet (ie, device-agnostic). K-CASCADE cohort of Korean HBOC mutation carriers and relatives will be based on the CASCADE infrastructure. Narrative data collected through individual interviews or mini focus groups from 20 to 24 HBOC family members per linguistic region and 6-10 health care providers involved in genetic services will identify the local cultures and context, and inform the content of the tailored messages. The efficacy of the digital health intervention against a comparison website will be assessed in a randomized trial with 104 HBOC mutation carriers (52 in each study arm). The translatability of the digital health intervention will be assessed using survey data collected from HBOC families and health care providers. Results Funding was received in October 2019. It is projected that data collection will be completed by January 2023 and results will be published in fall 2023. Conclusions This study addresses the continuum of translational research, from developing an international research infrastructure and adapting an existing digital health intervention to testing its efficacy in a randomized controlled trial and exploring its translatability using an established framework. Adapting existing interventions, rather than developing new ones, takes advantage of previous valid experiences without duplicating efforts. Culturally sensitive web-based interventions that enhance family communication and understanding of genetic cancer risk are timely. This collaboration creates a research infrastructure between Switzerland and Korea that can be scaled up to cover other hereditary cancer syndromes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04214210; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04214210 and CRiS KCT0005643; https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/ International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/26264
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sue Kim
- Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, College of Nursing, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Monica Aceti
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Vasiliki Baroutsou
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Nicole Bürki
- Women's Clinic and Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Maria Caiata-Zufferey
- La Scuola Universitaria Professionale della Svizzera Italiana (SUPSI), Manno, Switzerland
| | - Marco Cattaneo
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Pierre O Chappuis
- Unit of Oncogenetics, Division of Oncology, Division of Genetic Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Florina M Ciorba
- Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz
- Women's Clinic and Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Joon Jeong
- Department of Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - MiSook M Jung
- College of Nursing, Chungnam National University, Deajeon, Republic of Korea
| | - Sung-Won Kim
- Dairim St Mary's Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Jisun Kim
- Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, College of Medicine, University of Ulsan, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Myong Cheol Lim
- Division of Tumor Immunology, Center for Gynecologic Cancer Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea
| | - Chang Ming
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Hyung Seok Park
- Department of Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Sang Hyung Park
- Department of Computer Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Carla A Pedrazzani
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Manuela Rabaglio
- University Clinic for Medical Oncology, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Jai Min Ryu
- Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, School of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Ramon Saccilotto
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Simon Wieser
- School of Management and Law, Winterthur Institute of Health Economics, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Ursina Zürrer-Härdi
- Medical Oncology and Hematology, Kantonsspital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Maria C Katapodi
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pande M, Peterson S, Lynch PM. Development and evaluation of an online, patient-driven, family outreach intervention to facilitate sharing of genetic risk information in families with Lynch syndrome. J Med Genet 2021; 59:589-596. [PMID: 34006620 DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Revised: 04/28/2021] [Accepted: 04/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Identifying at-risk relatives of individuals with genetic conditions facilitates 'cascade' genetic testing and cancer prevention. Although current standards of care give mutation-positive (index) patients the responsibility of sharing genetic risk information with relatives, the communication is suboptimal, limited largely to close relatives. We developed FamilyCONNECT, a provider-mediated, patient-navigated online tool to facilitate family outreach, and assessed its feasibility, usability and acceptability. METHODS (1) Development of the FamilyCONNECT prototype; (2) testing using online surveys of: (a) members of Lynch Syndrome (LS) International (LSI); (b) genetics service providers; and (3) hands-on testing with patients with LS. RESULTS (1) FamilyCONNECT's features include introductory email to elicit participation, informational website/video, identity authentication/account creation, informed consent, sharing of genetic test results, pedigree expansion and process to invite at-risk relatives. (2a) 33% of the 170 LSI participants completed the survey. FamilyCONNECT's features received favourable responses from at least 79% of respondents. Unfavourable responses were for length of the consent document and mistrust of opening emailed links. (2b) Thirty-five genetics professionals responded to the providers' survey. Key perceived barriers to FamilyCONNECT's usage were privacy/confidentiality (83%), a lack of institutional resources (76%), a defined process (66%) and time (69%). (3) Ten patients navigated data collection fields and provided feedback for improvements. CONCLUSION FamilyCONNECT tool's content and features were well received among patients with LS as well as providers. The tool could be a viable alternative to increase family outreach among patients with LS. Future efforts will focus on refining FamilyCONNECT and assessing its uptake and utilisation by patients with LS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mala Pande
- Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Susan Peterson
- Behavioral Science, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Patrick M Lynch
- Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bowen DJ, Makhnoon S, Shirts BH, Fullerton SM, Larson E, Ralston JD, Leppig K, Crosslin DR, Veenstra D, Jarvik GP. What improves the likelihood of people receiving genetic test results communicating to their families about genetic risk? PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2021; 104:726-731. [PMID: 33455827 PMCID: PMC8005444 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2020] [Revised: 12/09/2020] [Accepted: 01/01/2021] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We currently rely on probands to communicate genetic testing results and health risks within a family to stimulate preventive behaviors, such as cascade testing. Rates of guidelines-based cascade testing are low, possibly due to low frequency or non-urgent communication of risk among family members. Understanding what is being communicated and why may help improve interventions that increase communication and rates of cascade testing. METHODS Participants (n = 189) who were to receive both positive and negative colorectal cancer (CRC) sequencing results completed surveys on family communication, family functioning, impact of cancer in the family, and future communication of risk and were participants in eMERGE3. Questions were taken from existing surveys and administered electronically using email and a web driven tool. RESULTS Common family member targets of CRC risk communication, before results were received, were mothers and fathers, then sisters and grandchildren and finally, children and brothers. A communication impact score of 0.66 (sd = 0.83) indicated low-to-moderate communication impact. Age and education were significantly associated with frequency of familial communication, but not on the cancer-related impact of familial communication. CONCLUSIONS There is infrequent communication about cancer risk from probands to family members. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS These results demonstrate an opportunity to help families improve communication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah J Bowen
- Department of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| | - Sukh Makhnoon
- Department of Behavioral Science, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
| | - Brian H Shirts
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | | | - Eric Larson
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, USA
| | - James D Ralston
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, USA; Department of Bioinformatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - Kathleen Leppig
- Genetic Services, Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, USA
| | - David R Crosslin
- Department of Bioinformatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - David Veenstra
- Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - Gail P Jarvik
- Departments of Medicine (Medical Genetics) and Genome Sciences, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Baroutsou V, Underhill-Blazey ML, Appenzeller-Herzog C, Katapodi MC. Interventions Facilitating Family Communication of Genetic Testing Results and Cascade Screening in Hereditary Breast/Ovarian Cancer or Lynch Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040925. [PMID: 33672149 PMCID: PMC7926393 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040925] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2020] [Revised: 01/29/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Evidence-based guidelines recommend cascade genetic testing of blood relatives of known Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) or Lynch Syndrome (LS) cases, to inform individualized cancer screening and prevention plans. The study identified interventions designed to facilitate family communication of genetic testing results and/or cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing for HBOC and LS. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials that assessed intervention efficacy for these two outcomes. Additional outcomes were also recorded and synthesized when possible. Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis and 13 in the meta-analysis. Lack of participant blinding was the most common risk of bias. Interventions targeted HBOC (n = 5); both HBOC and LS (n = 4); LS (n = 3); or ovarian cancer (n = 2). All protocols (n = 14) included a psychoeducational and/or counseling component. Additional components were decision aids (n = 4), building communication skills (n = 4), or motivational interviewing (n = 1). The overall effect size for family communication was small (g = 0.085) and not significant (p = 0.344), while for cascade testing, it was small (g = 0.169) but significant (p = 0.014). Interventions show promise for improving cancer predisposition cascade genetic testing for HBOC and LS. Future studies should employ family-based approaches and include racially diverse samples.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vasiliki Baroutsou
- Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, 4055 Basel, Switzerland;
| | - Meghan L. Underhill-Blazey
- School of Nursing, Wilmot Cancer Institute Hereditary Cancer Program, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14642, USA;
| | | | - Maria C. Katapodi
- Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Basel, 4055 Basel, Switzerland;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +41-61-207-04-30
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
The FamilyTalk randomized controlled trial: patient-reported outcomes in clinical genetic sequencing for colorectal cancer. Cancer Causes Control 2021; 32:483-492. [PMID: 33591484 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-021-01398-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2020] [Accepted: 01/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
As genetics gains favor in clinical oncology, it is important to address patient concerns around confidentiality, privacy, and security of genetic information that might otherwise limit its utilization. We designed a randomized controlled trial to assess the social impact of an online educational tool (FamilyTalk) to increase family communication about colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and screening. Of 208 randomized participants, 149 (71.6%) returned six-month surveys. Overall, there was no difference in CRC screening between the study arms. Privacy and confidentiality concerns about medical and genetic information, reactions to genetic test results, and lifestyle changes did not differ between arms. Participants with pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) results were more likely than those with negative results to report that the results accurately predicted their disease risks (OR 5.37, p = 0.02 and OR 3.13, p = 0.02, respectively). This trial demonstrated no evidence that FamilyTalk impacted patient-reported outcomes. Low power, due to the limited number of participants with P/LP results in the overall sample, as well as the short follow-up period, could have contributed to the null findings.
Collapse
|
9
|
Brédart A, Kop JL, Dick J, Cano A, De Pauw A, Anota A, Brunet J, Devilee P, Stoppa-Lyonnet D, Schmutzler R, Dolbeault S. Psychosocial problems in women attending French, German and Spanish genetics clinics before and after targeted or multigene testing results: an observational prospective study. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e029926. [PMID: 31551380 PMCID: PMC6773290 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES AND SETTING Advances in multigene panel testing for cancer susceptibility has increased the complexity of counselling, requiring particular attention to counselees' psychosocial needs. Changes in psychosocial problems before and after genetic testing were prospectively compared between genetic test results in women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic susceptibility in French, German and Spanish clinics. PARTICIPANTS AND MEASURES Among 752 counselees consecutively approached, 646 (86%) were assessed after the initial genetic consultation (T1), including 510 (68%) affected with breast cancer, of which 460 (61%) were assessed again after receiving the test result (T2), using questionnaires addressing genetic-specific psychosocial problems (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer (PAHC)-six scales). Sociodemographic and clinical data were also collected. RESULTS Seventy-nine (17.2%), 19 (4.1%), 259 (56.3%), 44 (9.6%) and 59 (12.8%) women received a BRCA1/2, another high/moderate-risk pathogenic variant (PV), negative uninformative, true negative (TN) or variant of uncertain significance result (VUS), respectively. On multiple regression analyses, compared with women receiving another result, those with a VUS decreased more in psychosocial problems related to hereditary predisposition (eg, coping with the test result) (ß=-0.11, p<0.05) and familial/social issues (eg, risk communication) (ß=-0.13, p<0.05), almost independently from their problems before testing. Women with a PV presented no change in hereditary predisposition problems and, so as women with a TN result, a non-significant increase in familial/social issues. Other PAHC scales (ie, emotions, familial cancer, personal cancer and children-related issues) were not affected by genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS In women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic risk in European genetics clinics, psychosocial problems were mostly unaffected by genetic testing. Apart from women receiving a VUS result, those with another test result presented unchanged needs in counselling in particular about hereditary predisposition and familial/social issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Brédart
- Department of Supportive Care, Psycho-Oncology Unit, Institut Curie, Paris, France
- Psychopathology and Health Process Laboratory, University Paris Descartes, Boulogne-Billancourt, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Luc Kop
- Département de Psychologie, Université de Lorraine, 2LPN (CEMA), Nancy, France
| | - Julia Dick
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre and Faculty of Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
| | - Alejandra Cano
- Clinical and Health Psychology Department, University Autónoma of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Amélie Anota
- French National Quality of Life in Oncology Platform, and Methodology; Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France
| | - Joan Brunet
- Medical Oncology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Peter Devilee
- Division of Pathology; Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Rita Schmutzler
- Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre and Faculty of Medicine, Cologne University Hospital, Cologne, Germany
| | - Sylvie Dolbeault
- Department of Supportive Care, Psycho-Oncology Unit, Institut Curie, Paris, France
- CESP, University Paris-Sud, UVSQ, INSERM, University Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| |
Collapse
|