Setting a baseline: A 7-year review of referral rates and outcomes for serous ovarian cancer prior to implementation of oncologist mediated genetic testing

Improving Access to Hereditary Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Approximately 5%-10% of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have an inherited basis, yet uptake of genetic testing remains low and subject to disparities. This study compared two genetic testing pathways available to patients referred to a provincial cancer center, BC Cancer: a traditional hereditary cancer clinic-initiated testing (HCT) pathway and a new oncology clinic-initiated testing (OCT) pathway.

METHODS

Study subjects were patients with confirmed PDAC referred for genetic testing through the HCT or OCT pathway between June 1, 2020, and February 1, 2022. Charts were retrospectively reviewed for patient characteristics and testing outcomes.

RESULTS

The study population was 397 patients (HCT, n = 279 and OCT, n = 118). OCT patients were more likely to have non-European ethnicity compared with HCT patients (41.9% v 25.6%, P = .004), to have earlier-stage disease (P = .012), and to have better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status than the HCT group (P = .001). A total of 306 patients completed testing (77%). OCT patients had higher test completion rates than HCT patients (odds ratio, 3.74 [95% CI, 1.66 to 9.62]). Median time for results was shorter in OCT than in HCT (53 days [IQR, 44-76] v 107 days [IQR, 63.8-158.3]). Pancreatic cancer susceptibility pathogenic gene variants were identified in 8.5% (26/306).

CONCLUSION

The real-world observations in our study show that oncology clinic-initiated hereditary testing is more effective and faster than testing through hereditary cancer clinic referrals and reaches a more ethnically diverse population. This has important implications for publicly funded environments with limited resources for genetic counseling.

Rates of genetic consultation in high-grade serous ovarian cancer patients in the era of PARP inhibitor therapy: A population-based study

OBJECTIVE

The American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends all patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) undergo germline genetic testing. Genetic consultation rates in Ontario, Canada, only reached 13.3% in 2011. In 2016, PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy became available in Ontario for BRCA-positive HGSC patients. Given expanding treatment options, we re-examined genetic consultation rates among HGSC patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients diagnosed with HGSC between 2012 and 2019 using population-based administrative data from Ontario. Genetics consultations were identified using Ontario Health Insurance Plan billing codes. Consultation rates over time were analyzed using Cochran-Armitage trend test and segmental regression analysis. Multivariable analysis identified factors associated with attending genetics consultation.

RESULTS

This study included 4645 HGSC patients. The mean age was 64.2 years (±SD 12.3); 56.3% had stage 3-4 disease. Overall, approximately 35% attended genetics consultations. The genetic consultation rate per year increased significantly from 21.6% to 42.6% (P < 0.001). Shorter times between diagnosis and genetics consult were observed after PARP inhibitors became available (68.1 vs 34.1 weeks, P < 0.001). Patients treated at designated cancer centers (odds ratio [OR] 2.11, P < 0.001), diagnosed in later years (OR 1.33, P < 0.001), and from higher income groups (P < 0.05) were more likely to attend genetics consultation; older patients were less likely (OR 0.98, P < 0.001). After PARP inhibitors became available, consultation rates plateaued (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2012 and 2019, genetic consultation rates improved significantly among HGSC patients; however, a large proportion of patients never attended consultation. Further exploration of barriers to care is warranted to improve consultation rates and ensure equitable access to care.

A mainstreaming oncogenomics model: improving the identification of Lynch syndrome

Introduction

"Mainstreaming" is a proposed strategy to integrate genomic testing into oncology. The aim of this paper is to develop a mainstreaming oncogenomics model by identifying health system interventions and implementation strategies for mainstreaming Lynch syndrome genomic testing.

Methods

A rigorous theoretical approach inclusive of conducting a systematic review and qualitative and quantitative studies was undertaken using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Theory-informed implementation data were mapped to the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research framework to generate potential strategies.

Results

The systematic review identified a lack of theory-guided health system interventions and evaluation for Lynch syndrome and other mainstreaming programs. The qualitative study phase included 22 participants from 12 health organizations. The quantitative Lynch syndrome survey included 198 responses: 26% and 66% from genetic and oncology health professionals, respectively. Studies identified the relative advantage and clinical utility of mainstreaming to improve genetic test access and to streamline care, and adaptation of current processes was recognized for results delivery and follow-up. Barriers identified included funding, infrastructure and resources, and the need for process and role delineation. The interventions to overcome barriers were as follows: embedded mainstream genetic counselors, electronic medical record genetic test ordering, results tracking, and mainstreaming education resources. Implementation evidence was connected through the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research framework resulting in a mainstreaming oncogenomics model.

Discussion

The proposed mainstreaming oncogenomics model acts as a complex intervention. It features an adaptable suite of implementation strategies to inform Lynch syndrome and other hereditary cancer service delivery. Implementation and evaluation of the model are required in future research.

Genetic Testing in the Latinx community: Impact of acculturation and provider relationships

OBJECTIVES

The current study aimed to explore attitudes toward genetic germline testing and intentions to test in Latinas from Southern California. We hypothesized that patients' acculturation and education levels, as well as comfort with health care providers, are positively associated with attitudes and intentions toward genetic testing.

METHODS

A survey was offered concurrently to Latinx female patients at a gynecologic oncology practice and to unaffiliated Latinx community members. The survey assessed demographics, structural, psychosocial, and acculturation factors and genetic testing attitudes and intentions via validated scales.

RESULTS

Of 148 surveys collected, 66% of responders had low levels of acculturation. 50% of women had government-subsidized insurance; 22% had no schooling in the US. 67% of participants did not carry a diagnosis of cancer. Women with higher acculturation levels were more likely to consider genetic testing (r_s = 0.54, p = .001). Higher acculturated women and less acculturated women under 50 were more likely to consider testing if it had been recommended by a female, trusted, or Hispanic/Latinx provider (r_s = 0.22, p = .01, r_s = 0.27, p = .003 and r_s = 0.19, p = .003, respectively) or if there was a recent cancer diagnosis (self or family, r_s = 0.19, p = .03). Overall, education correlated with intention to test. The more education outside of the US, the less negative was the attitude toward being tested (r_s = -0.41, p = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct experiences with cancer, more schooling and higher acculturation coupled with provider characteristics determined if Latinas were more open to testing. Provider characteristics mattered: having a female, Latinx, Spanish speaking provider was important for genetic testing decision-making. These findings are particularly pertinent in areas with high Latinx populations.

Theory Designed Strategies to Support Implementation of Genomics in Nephrology

(1) Background: Genomic testing is increasingly utilized as a clinical tool; however, its integration into nephrology remains limited. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and prioritize interventions for the widespread implementation of genomics in nephrology. (2) Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 Australian adult nephrologists to determine their perspectives on interventions and models of care to support implementation of genomics in nephrology. Interviews were guided by a validated theoretical framework for the implementation of genomic medicine-the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR). (3) Results: Nephrologists were from 18 hospitals, with 7 having a dedicated multidisciplinary kidney genetics service. Most practiced in the public healthcare system (n = 24), a large number were early-career (n = 13), and few had genomics experience (n = 4). The top three preferred interventions were increased funding, access to genomics champions, and education and training. Where interventions to barriers were not reported, we used the CFIR/Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change matching tool to generate theory-informed approaches. The preferred model of service delivery was a multidisciplinary kidney genetics clinic. (4) Conclusions: This study identified surmountable barriers and practical interventions for the implementation of genomics in nephrology, with multidisciplinary kidney genetics clinics identified as the preferred model of care. The integration of genomics education into nephrology training, secure funding for testing, and counselling along with the identification of genomics champions should be pursued by health services more broadly.

Understanding the Experience of Canadian Women Living with Ovarian Cancer through the Every Woman StudyTM

The Every Woman StudyTM: Canadian Edition is the most comprehensive study to date exploring patient-reported experiences of ovarian cancer (OC) on a national scale. An online survey conducted in Fall 2020 included individuals diagnosed with OC in Canada, reporting responses from 557 women from 11 Canadian provinces/territories. Median age at diagnosis was 54 (11−80), 61% were diagnosed between 2016−2020, 59% were stage III/IV and all subtypes of OC were represented. Overall, 23% had a family history of OC, 75% had genetic testing and 19% reported having a BRCA1/2 mutation. Most (87%) had symptoms prior to diagnosis. A timely diagnosis of OC (≤3 months from first presentation with symptoms) was predicted by age (>50) or abdominal pain/persistent bloating as the primary symptom. Predictors of an acute diagnosis (<1 month) included region, ER/urgent care doctor as first healthcare provider or stage III/IV disease. Regional differences in genetic testing, treatments and clinical trial participation were also noted. Respondents cited substantial physical, emotional, practical and financial impacts of an OC diagnosis. Our national survey has revealed differences in the pathway to diagnosis and post-diagnostic care among Canadian women with OC, with region, initial healthcare provider, specific symptoms and age playing key roles. We have identified many opportunities to improve both clinical and supportive care of OC patients across the country.

The correlation between BRCA status and surgical cytoreduction in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

BRCA-associated ovarian cancers are biologically unique; it is unclear if this translates to favorable outcomes at the time of primary cytoreduction (PCS). The aim of this study was to compare the amount of residual disease after PCS in BRCA mutated (BRCAm) and wild-type (BRCAwt) high-grade serous ovarian cancers (HGSC), and to assess whether BRCA status was an independent predictor of complete cytoreduction.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with stage III/IV HGSC with known germline and somatic BRCA status, treated with PCS from 2000 to 2017. We compared the complete, optimal and suboptimal cytoreduction rates between the BRCAm and BRCAwt cohorts and built a predictive model to assess whether BRCA status was predictive of complete cytoreduction.

RESULTS

Of 303 treated with PCS, 120 were germline/somatic BRCAm (40%) and 183 were BRCAwt (60%). BRCAm women tended to be younger, but there were no differences between the two groups in preoperative CA-125, disease burden, surgical complexity, length of surgery, or perioperative complications. BRCAm group had a higher rate of complete cytoreduction to no residual disease (0 mm) [72% vs. 48%] (p < 0.001). In a multivariate model, after accounting for age, length of surgery, CA-125 level, stage, disease burden and surgical complexity, BRCAm status was predictive of 0 mm residual disease with odds ratio of 5.3 (95% CI 2.45-11.5; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

BRCAm status is predictive of complete cytoreduction at the time of PCS. Despite similar disease burden and surgical efforts, one is more likely to achieve complete resection in BRCAm HGSC.

The Prevent Ovarian Cancer Program (POCP): Identification of women at risk for ovarian cancer using complementary recruitment approaches

BACKGROUND

Up to 20% of high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (HGSOC) are hereditary; however, historical uptake of genetic testing is low. We used a unique combination of approaches to identify women in Ontario, Canada, with a first-degree relative (FDR) who died from HGSOC without prior genetic testing, and offer them multi-gene panel testing.

METHODS

From May 2015-Sept 2019, genetic counseling and testing was provided to eligible participants. Two recruitment strategies were employed, including self-identification in response to an outreach campaign and direct targeting of FDRs of deceased HGSOC patients treated at our institution. The rate of pathogenic variants (PV) in established/potential ovarian cancer risk genes and the benefits/challenges of each approach were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 564 women enrolled in response to our outreach campaign (n = 473) or direct recruitment (n = 91). Mean age at consent was 52 years and 96% did not meet provincial testing criteria. Genetic results were provided to 528 individuals from 458 families. The rate of PVs in ovarian cancer risk genes was highest when FDRs were diagnosed with HGSOC <60 years (9.4% vs. 3.9% ≥ 60y, p = 0.0160). Participants in the outreach vs. direct recruitment cohort had a similar rate of PVs; however, uptake of genetic testing (97% vs. 89%; p = 0.0036) and study completion (95% vs. 87%; p = 0.0062) rates were higher in the former. Eleven participants with pathogenic variants have completed risk-reducing gynecologic surgery, with one stage I HGSOC and two breast cancers identified.

CONCLUSION

Overall PV rates in this large cohort were lower than expected; however, we provide evidence that genetic testing criteria in Ontario should include individuals with a deceased FDR diagnosed with HGSOC <60 years of age.

Stay at home: implementation and impact of virtualising cancer genetic services during COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid adoption of virtual clinic processes and healthcare delivery. Herein, we examine the impact of virtualising genetics services at Canada’s largest cancer centre. A retrospective review was conducted to evaluate relevant metrics during the 12 weeks prior to and during virtual care, including referral and clinic volumes, patient wait times and genetic testing uptake. The number of appointments and new patients seen were maintained during virtual care. Likewise, there was a significant increase in the number of patients offered testing during virtual care who did not provide a blood sample (176/180 (97.7%) vs 180/243 (74.1%); p<0.001), and a longer median time from the date of pretest genetic counselling to the date a sample was given (0 vs 11 days; p<0.001). Referral volumes significantly decreased during virtual care (35 vs 22; p<0.001), which was accompanied by a decreased median wait time for first appointment (55 days vs 30 days; p<0.001). The rapid virtualisation of cancer genetic services allowed the genetics clinic to navigate the COVID-19 pandemic without compromising clinical volumes or access to genetic testing. There was a decrease in referral volumes and uptake of genetic testing, which may be attributable to pandemic-related clinical restrictions.