Interest and attitudes of patients, cancer physicians, medical students and cancer researchers towards a spectrum of genetic tests relevant to breast cancer patients

Acceptability and Feasibility of Genetic Testing to Assess Risk of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Impairment Among Thai Adolescents and Young Adults

Host genetic factors may modify the risk of developing HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment (HIV-NCI), and genetic research has the potential to inform novel treatments for HIV-NCI. However, there is a need to better understand the acceptability of genetic testing among distinct populations of people living with HIV at increased risk for HIV-NCI, such as young people living with perinatally acquired HIV (PHIV) in low- and middle-income countries, to gauge the feasibility of genetic research within these populations. This pilot study evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of genetic testing to assess risk of future neurocognitive problems in 50 Thai adolescents and young adults (13-24 years; Meanage = 19.16 [standard deviation = 3.09]; 52% female) with PHIV and demographically similar HIV-negative controls. Participants (25 PHIV; 25 controls) completed a survey assessing acceptability of and concerns about genetic testing and were asked to provide blood samples for genetic testing. Descriptive statistics and blood draw completion rates were produced and calculated. Reported concerns about genetic testing were grouped thematically and tallied. Independent t tests and chi-squares explored demographic differences between participants who reported concerns and peers. Results indicated 46 participants (92%) rated genetic testing as "acceptable" or "completely acceptable." Eight participants (16%) reported concerns about genetic testing. The most common concerns were related to genetic information being shared or misused. Compared with participants without concerns, participants who reported concerns had more years of education and were more likely to have postsecondary schooling. Regarding completion rates, 49 participants (98%) agreed to genetic testing and provided blood samples. Overall, results support the acceptability and feasibility of incorporating genetic testing into research investigating HIV-NCI among adolescents and young adults in Thailand. Findings provide important considerations for planning future genetic studies among young people in Thailand.

Motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Single-gene testing is associated with psycho-social challenges for cancer patients. Genomic testing may amplify these. The aim of this study was to understand patients' motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing, to enable healthcare providers to support their patients throughout the testing process and interpretation of test results.

METHODS

Five databases were searched for original peer reviewed research articles published between January 2001 and September 2018 addressing motivation for genomic cancer testing. QualSyst was used to assess quality.

RESULTS

182 studies were identified and 17 were included for review. Studies were heterogenous. Both somatic and germline testing were included, and 14 studies used hypothetical scenarios. 3249 participants were analyzed, aged 18 to 94. Most were female and white. The most common diagnoses were breast, ovarian, lung and colorectal cancer. Interest in testing was high. Motivations included ability to predict cancer risk, inform disease management, benefit families, and understand cancer. Barriers included concerns about cost, privacy/confidentiality, clinical utility, and psychological harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite concerns, consumers are interested in cancer genomic testing if it can provide actionable results for themselves and their families.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Providers must manage understanding and expectations of testing and translate genetic information into health-promoting behaviours.

Factors shaping at-risk individuals' decisions to undergo genetic testing for cancer in Asia

This study aims to enrich our understanding of factors influencing medically indicated at-risk individuals' decisions to take genetic tests (or not) in the context of cancer treatment and prevention. While previous studies have explored this topic in communities in Europe and the United States, we know relatively little about the situation in Asia. In this study, we conducted in-depth interviews with 24 women who underwent genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes in Singapore. Grounded theory with thematic analysis was applied. Six encouraging and three discouraging factors are identified in the analysis. The six encouraging factors are: desire to create awareness for self and family; perceived benefits for self and family; strong family history of cancer; presence of family support; medical professional recommendation and adequate amount of time to consider undertaking the test. The three discouraging factors are: high costs of tests; perceived lack of ability to cope with test results; and insufficient information about genetic testing. Taken together, the findings in this study add to the current literature by providing empirical evidence regarding the importance of holding family included pre-test counselling and providing adequate time for patients to decide to undergo genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.

Healthcare professionals' attitudes toward cancer precision medicine: A systematic review

Use of precision medicine in oncology is burgeoning and can provide patients with new treatment options. However, it is not clear how precision medicine is impacting healthcare professionals (HCPs), particularly with regards to their concerns about this new approach. We therefore synthesized the existing literature on HCPs' attitudes toward cancer precision medicine. We searched four databases for relevant articles. Two reviewers screened eligible articles and extracted data. We assessed the quality of each article using the QualSyst tool. We found 22 articles, representing 4,321 HCPs (63.7% cancer specialists). HCPs held largely positive attitudes toward cancer precision medicine, including their capacity to facilitate treatment decisions and provide prognostic information. However, they also had concerns regarding costs, insurance coverage, limited HCP knowledge about precision medicine, potential misuse, difficulties accessing the tests, and delays in receiving test results. Most HCPs felt that test-related decisions should be shared between families and HCPs. HCPs intended to disclose actionable results but were less inclined to disclose negative/secondary findings. HCPs had a strong preference for genetic counselor involvement when disclosing germline findings. Most HCPs intended to use somatic and germline tests in their future practice but the extent to which pharmacogenomic tests will be used is uncertain. HCPs indicated that additional evidence supporting test utility and increased availability of treatment guidelines could facilitate the use of testing. HCPs held generally positive attitudes toward cancer precision medicine, however there were some key concerns. Addressing concerns early, devising educational support for HCPs and developing guidelines may facilitate the successful implementation of precision medicine trials in the future.

A theory-informed systematic review of clinicians' genetic testing practices

This systematic literature review investigates factors impacting on clinicians' decisions to offer genetic tests in their practice, and maps them to a theoretical behaviour change framework. Better understanding of these factors will inform the design of effective interventions to integrate genomics tests into clinical care. We conducted a narrative synthesis of empirical research of medical specialists' perspectives on and experiences of offering genetic tests to their patients. This review was based upon the PRISMA statement and guidelines for reviewing qualitative research. Four electronic data sources were searched-MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed. Studies were independently assessed by two authors. Content analysis was applied to map the findings of included studies to a framework validated for behaviour and implementation research, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The TDF describes 14 factors known to influence behaviour and has been applied in diverse clinical settings to understand and/or modify health professional behaviour. Thirty-four studies published in 39 articles met inclusion and quality criteria. Most studies were published after 2011 (54%), Northern American (82%), quantitative in design (68%) and addressed familial cancer genetic tests (53%). Of the 14 TDF factors, 13 were identified. The three most common factors were: Environmental Context and Resources (n = 33), Beliefs about Consequences (n = 26), and Knowledge (n = 23). To support the adoption of genomic tests beyond specialist services, nuanced interventions targeting considerations beyond clinician education are needed. For instance, interventions addressing organisational constraints which may restrict clinicians' ability to offer genomic tests are required alongside those targeting factors intrinsic to the clinician.

Does biomarker information impact breast cancer patients' preferences and physician recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy?

PURPOSE

This study aimed to examine how biomarker information would impact patients' preferences and physicians' recommendations for adjuvant breast cancer therapy.

METHODS

At the 18-month follow-up, participants in a large, double-blind randomized controlled trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with bevacizumab or placebo (E5103) were surveyed about their preferred treatment (either chemotherapy A alone or chemotherapy A+B) in two hypothetical scenarios: (1) without biomarker information; and (2) after learning that they tested positive for a "B-receptor" which modestly increased both the benefit and toxicity expected with chemotherapy A+B. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the prospectively collected survey data and used the McNemar's test to examine changes in treatment preferences. A one-time survey of clinical investigators who enrolled patients on the trial evaluated physician recommendations in response to the same biomarker information.

RESULTS

439 patients completed both scenarios on 18-month survey. Most participants preferred A+B in both scenario 1 and 2 (77 and 76% respectively). The increase in benefit and toxicity associated with the positive biomarker information in scenario 2 led 60/439 (14%) of patients to switch their treatment preference. The corresponding physician survey revealed that most physicians chose regimen A+B in scenario 1 (77%), and moreso after the biomarker information was available in scenario 2 (84%).

CONCLUSIONS

Information about a positive biomarker indicating increased benefit and toxicity from additional chemotherapy did not change many participants' preferred treatment. The majority preferred the most effective course in both scenarios. Similarly, most investigators discounted increased toxicity and valued increased benefit. Parent Trial Registration: NCT00433511.

Genomic medicine practice among physicians in Taiwan

Aim: To examine genomic medicine (GM) practice and associated factors (i.e., attitudes, intention, self-efficacy, previous training in genomics, and demographic characteristics) among Taiwanese physicians. Methods: A survey was distributed to physicians attending an internal training workshop at a large medical center in Taiwan. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. Results: A total of 137 physicians comprised our final sample; less than a third of them had practiced GM. Yet, participants overall had positive intention, favorable attitudes, and high self-efficacy in GM practice. Moreover, intention, attitudes, self-efficacy, educational level, and continuing education in GM were positively and significantly associated with participants’ GM practice. Conclusion: Offering continuing education for Taiwanese physicians is needed to enhance their practice in GM.

Patient and provider attitudes toward genomic testing for prostate cancer susceptibility: a mixed method study

BACKGROUND

The strong association between family history and prostate cancer (PCa) suggests a significant genetic contribution, yet specific highly penetrant PCa susceptibility genes have not been identified. Certain single-nucleotide-polymorphisms have been found to correlate with PCa risk; however uncertainty remains regarding their clinical utility and how to best incorporate this information into clinical decision-making. Genetic testing is available directly to consumers and both patients and healthcare providers are becoming more aware of this technology. Purchasing online allows patients to bypass their healthcare provider yet patients may have difficulty interpreting test results and providers may be called upon to interpret results. Determining optimal ways to educate both patients and providers, and strategies for appropriately incorporating this information into clinical decision-making are needed.

METHODS

A mixed-method study was conducted in Utah between October 2011 and December 2011. Eleven focus group discussions were held and surveys were administered to 23 first-degree relatives of PCa patients living in Utah and 24 primary-care physicians and urologists practicing in Utah to present specific information about these assessments and determine knowledge and attitudes regarding health implications of using these assessments.

RESULTS

Data was independently coded by two researchers (relative Kappa = .88; provider Kappa = .77) and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Results indicated differences in attitudes and behavioral intentions between patient and provider. Despite the test's limitations relatives indicated interest in genetic testing (52%) while most providers indicated they would not recommend the test for their patients (79%). Relatives expected providers to interpret genetic test results and use results to provide personalized healthcare recommendations while the majority of providers did not think the information would be useful in patient care (92%) and indicated low-levels of genetic self-efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although similarities exist, discordance between provider and patient attitudes may influence the effective translation of novel genomic tests into clinical practice suggesting both patient and provider perceptions and expectations be considered in development of clinical decision-support tools.