Family history in public health practice: a genomic tool for disease prevention and health promotion

Preeclampsia prediction with maternal and paternal polygenic risk scores: the TMM BirThree Cohort Study

Genomic information from pregnant women and the paternal parent of their fetuses may provide effective biomarkers for preeclampsia (PE). This study investigated the association of parental polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for blood pressure (BP) and PE with PE onset and evaluated predictive performances of PRSs using clinical predictive variables. In the Tohoku Medical Megabank Project Birth and Three-Generation Cohort Study, 19,836 participants were genotyped using either Affymetrix Axiom Japonica Array v2 (further divided into two cohorts-the PRS training cohort and the internal-validation cohort-at a ratio of 1:2) or Japonica Array NEO (external-validation cohort). PRSs were calculated for systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and PE and hyperparameters for PRS calculation were optimized in the training cohort. PE onset was associated with maternal SBP-, DBP-, and PE-PRSs and paternal SBP- and DBP-PRSs only in the external-validation cohort. Meta-analysis revealed overall associations with maternal PRSs but highlighted significant heterogeneity between cohorts. Maternal DBP-PRS calculated using "LDpred2" presented the most improvement in prediction models and provided additional predictive information on clinical predictive variables. Paternal DBP-PRS improved prediction models in the internal-validation cohort. In conclusion, Parental PRS, along with clinical predictive variables, is potentially useful for predicting PE.

Relatively independent and complementary roles of family history and polygenic risk score in age at onset and incident cases of 12 common diseases

Few studies have systematically compared the overlap and complementarity of family history (FH) and polygenic risk score (PRS) in terms of disease risk. We here investigated the impacts of FH and PRS on the risk of incident diseases or age at disease onset, as well as their clinical value in risk prediction. We analyzed 12 diseases in the prospective cohort study of UK Biobank (N = 461,220). First, restricted mean survival time analysis was performed to evaluate the influences of FH and PRS on age at onset. Then, Cox proportional hazards model was employed to estimate the effects of FH and PRS on the incident risk. Finally, prediction models were constructed to examine the clinical value of FH and PRS in the incident disease risk. Compared to negative FH, positive FH led to an earlier onset, with an average of 2.29 years earlier between the top and bottom 2.5% PRSs and high blood pressure showing the greatest difference of 6.01 years earlier. Both FH and PRS were related to higher incident risk; but they only exhibited weak interactions on high blood pressure and Alzheimer's disease/dementia, and provided relatively independent and partially complementary information on disease susceptibility, with PRS explaining 7.0% of the FH effect but FH accounting for only 1.1% of the PRS effect for incident cases. Further, FH and PRS showed additional predictive value in risk evaluation, with breast cancer showing the greatest improvement (31.3%). FH and PRS significantly affect a variety of diseases, and they are not interchangeable measures of genetic susceptibility, but instead offer largely independent and partially complementary information. Incorporating FH, PRS, and clinical risk factors simultaneously leads to the greatest predictive value for disease risk assessment.

Family history and genetic risk score combined to guide cancer risk stratification: A prospective cohort study

Family history (FH) of cancer and polygenic risk scores (PRS) are pivotal for cancer risk assessment, yet their combined impact remains unclear. Participants in the UK Biobank (UKB) were recruited between 2006 and 2010, with complete follow-up data updated until February 2020 for Scotland and January 2021 for England and Wales. Using UKB data (N = 442,399), we constructed PRS and incidence-weighted overall cancer PRS (CPRS). FH was assessed through self-reported standardized questions. Among 202,801 men (34.6% with FH) and 239,598 women (42.0% with FH), Cox regression was used to examine the associations between FH, PRS, and cancer risk. We found a significant dose-response relationship between FH of cancer and corresponding cancer risk (Ptrend < .05), with over 10 significant pairs of cross-cancer effects of FH. FH and PRS are positively correlated and independent. Joint effects of FH of cancer (multiple cancers) and PRS (CPRS) on corresponding cancer risk were observed: for instance, compared with participants with no FH of cancer and low PRS, men with FH of cancer and high PRS had the highest risk of colorectal cancer (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.01-4.52). Additive interactions were observed in prostate and overall cancer risk for men and breast cancer for women, with the most significant result being a relative excess risk of interaction (RERI) of 2.98, accounting for ~34% of the prostate cancer risk. In conclusion, FH and PRS collectively contribute to cancer risk, supporting their combined application in personalized risk assessment and early intervention strategies.

Pharmacogenotyping disproves genetic cause of drug-related problems in family history: a case report

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice, family medication history is not routinely assessed as part of a patient's family health history (FHH). The information is self-reported and can depend on the individual's subjective perception. To illustrate how pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing results could be used to validate self-reported family medication history on drug-related problems (DRP), as well as to inform medication-related decisions, we herein present a case involving ten members of the same family.

CASE PRESENTATION

Prior to a planned surgery, a preemptive PGx panel test was performed for a nine-year-old girl due to self-reported family medication history. The PGx panel test was also performed for her three siblings, parents, and grandparents. The focus was directed to the paternal grandmother, as she reported DRP from the hypnotic agent propofol, and to the maternal grandmother, as she described DRP after the administration of codeine and tramadol. A commercial PGx panel test of 100 variations in 30 different genes was conducted and analyzed focusing on genetic variants in cytochrome P450 enzyme 2B6 (CYP2B6), and CYP2D6 as they are involved in the biotransformation of propofol and the bioactivation of codeine and tramadol, respectively. The girl was identified as (1) CYP2B6 intermediate metabolizer (IM) with reduced enzyme activity and (2) CYP2D6 poor metabolizer (PM) with no enzyme activity. Regarding the planned surgery, it was recommended (1) to carefully titrate propofol dosage with increased monitoring of potential DRP and (2) to avoid opioids whose activation is mediated by CYP2D6 (e.g. codeine and tramadol). Further PGx testing revealed (1) the paternal grandmother as CYP2B6 normal metabolizer (NM) and (2) the maternal grandmother as CYP2D6 NM.

CONCLUSION

The original trigger for PGx testing was the self-reported, conspicuous family medication history of DRP reported by the grandmothers. However, the girl's genotype predicted phenotypes of CYP2B6 IM and CYP2D6 PM, differed from the grandmothers'. With this exemplary case, we propose that hereditary concerns based on self-reported information on DRP should be verified by a PGx panel test, when the respective drug exhibits a PGx association. Also, the girl's PGx testing results provided important medication recommendations, which were considered perioperatively by the anesthetist suggesting to use PGx testing results preemptively to inform medication-related decisions.

Race adjustments in clinical algorithms can help correct for racial disparities in data quality

Despite ethical and historical arguments for removing race from clinical algorithms, the consequences of removal remain unclear. Here, we highlight a largely undiscussed consideration in this debate: varying data quality of input features across race groups. For example, family history of cancer is an essential predictor in cancer risk prediction algorithms but is less reliably documented for Black participants and may therefore be less predictive of cancer outcomes. Using data from the Southern Community Cohort Study, we assessed whether race adjustments could allow risk prediction models to capture varying data quality by race, focusing on colorectal cancer risk prediction. We analyzed 77,836 adults with no history of colorectal cancer at baseline. The predictive value of self-reported family history was greater for White participants than for Black participants. We compared two cancer risk prediction algorithms-a race-blind algorithm which included standard colorectal cancer risk factors but not race, and a race-adjusted algorithm which additionally included race. Relative to the race-blind algorithm, the race-adjusted algorithm improved predictive performance, as measured by goodness of fit in a likelihood ratio test (P-value: <0.001) and area under the receiving operating characteristic curve among Black participants (P-value: 0.006). Because the race-blind algorithm underpredicted risk for Black participants, the race-adjusted algorithm increased the fraction of Black participants among the predicted high-risk group, potentially increasing access to screening. More broadly, this study shows that race adjustments may be beneficial when the data quality of key predictors in clinical algorithms differs by race group.

Intensity-specific physical activity measured by accelerometer and the risk of mortality among individuals with cardiometabolic diseases: A prospective study from the UK Biobank

BACKGROUND

While the health benefits of physical activity for general population are well-recognized, the prospective associations of physical activity volume and intensity with mortality among cardiometabolic disease individuals remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the associations of accelerometer-measured intensity-specific physical activity with mortality risk among population with cardiometabolic disease.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from the United Kingdom (UK) across 22 assessment centers from 2006 to 2010.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 9524 participants from the UK Biobank (median: 67.00 years, interquartile range: 61.00-70.00 years) were included in final study.

METHODS

Accelerometer-measured total volume, moderate-to-vigorous and light intensity physical activity collecting from 2013 to 2015 were quantified using a machine learning model. Multivariable restricted cubic splines and Cox proportional hazard models with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were employed to examine the associations of interests.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period (median: 6.87 years; interquartile range: 6.32-7.39 years), there were 659 (6.92 %) death events with 218 (2.29 %) cardiovascular disease-related deaths and 441 (4.63 %) non-cardiovascular disease-related deaths separately. In the fully adjusted models, compared with participants in the lowest quartiles of total volume, moderate-to-vigorous and light physical activities, the adjusted HRs (95 % CIs) of all-cause mortality for those in the highest quartiles were 0.40 (0.31, 0.52), 0.48 (0.37, 0.61), and 0.56 (0.44, 0.71) while those for cardiovascular diseases-related mortality were 0.35 (0.22, 0.55), 0.52 (0.35, 0.78) and 0.59 (0.39, 0.88), and for non-cardiovascular diseases-related mortality, they were 0.42 (0.30, 0.59), 0.40 (0.29, 0.54) and 0.54 (0.40, 0.73), separately. The optimal moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity level for cardiovascular diseases-related mortality reduction was found to be in the third quartile (17.75-35.33 min/day). Furthermore, the observed inverse associations were mainly non-linear.

CONCLUSIONS

Promoting physical activity, regardless of intensity, is essential for individuals with cardiometabolic disease to reduce mortality risk. For both all-cause and cardiovascular disease-related and non-cardiovascular disease-related mortality, the observed decrease in risk seems to level off at a moderate level. The current findings deriving from precise device-based physical activity data provide inference for secondary prevention of cardiometabolic disease.

Do physicians know when to refer patients for genetic testing?

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are commonly approached with concerns involving patient genetics. This is a challenge because most PCPs lack expertise in genetic testing compared to their genetic counselor counterparts. Currently, the recommended best practice is to refer patients for genetic testing based on cancer-related family history questionnaires with a genetic counseling referral to discuss their results and any implications. However, the extent to which PCPs are using these questionnaires for this purpose remains poorly understood. In this cross-sectional study, PCPs were presented with the American Cancer Society's seven recommended family history questions to determine the percentage who consider each to be an indicator for referral to a genetics specialist. Questionnaires were completed by 88 of 260 attending PCPs at a national primary care review conference. The main outcome was the percentage of PCPs who identified each question as a trigger for genetic testing. Secondary outcomes included correlations with years of practice, genetics training, and methods used to obtain patient family history. Only two of the seven questions were considered triggers by most PCPs (range, 76-83%). The remaining five had lower percentages (range, 22-55%). Years of practice did not influence the number of triggers identified (Spearman correlation coefficient test: r = 0.05, p = 0.68). Few PCPs (3.4%) felt they had good to excellent genetics training during residency. Only 44.3% had genetics specialists available for referral. Overall, low percentages of PCPs consider the American Cancer Society questions to be triggers for genetic testing referrals. Furthermore, many do not have a genetics specialist or counselor available for referral. Addressing these concerns may help PCPs understand the basics of genetic testing and use standardized questionnaires to make appropriate referrals to genetic specialists, thereby reducing inappropriate referrals and improving appointment access to this precious resource for those who truly need it.

Coronary risk factor profiles according to different age categories in premature coronary artery disease patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention

Many studies have investigated the coronary risk factors (CRFs) among premature coronary artery disease (PCAD) patients. However, reports on the proportion and CRFs of PCAD according to different age cut-offs for PCAD is globally under-reported. This study aimed to determine the proportion of PCAD patients and analyse the significant CRFs according to different age cut-offs among percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-treated patients. Patients who underwent PCI between 2007 and 2018 in two cardiology centres were included (n = 29,241) and were grouped into four age cut-off groups that defines PCAD: (A) Males/females: < 45, (B) Males: < 50; Females: < 55, (C) Males: < 55; Females: < 60 and (D) Males: < 55; Females: < 65 years old. The average proportion of PCAD was 28%; 9.2% for group (A), 21.5% for group (B), 38.6% and 41.9% for group (C) and (D), respectively. The top three CRFs of PCAD were LDL-c level, TC level and hypertension (HTN). Malay ethnicity, smoking, obesity, family history of PCAD, TC level and history of MI were the independent predictors of PCAD across all age groups. The proportion of PCAD in Malaysia is higher compared to other studies. The most significant risk factors of PCAD are LDL-c, TC levels and HTN. Early prevention, detection and management of the modifiable risk factors are highly warranted to prevent PCAD.

Feasibility of an electronic patient-facing cancer family history tool in medically underserved populations

Purpose

We developed an electronic patient-facing family history collection tool including B-RST 3.0, PREMM5 risk assessments and "limited family knowledge/structure" information designed for primary care settings. We evaluated the tool's performance compared with genetic-counselor-collected information for clinical risk stratification in a population with barriers to access.

Methods

English- or Spanish-speaking patients aged 18 to 49 were invited to participate. Individuals with limited family knowledge or at high or moderate risk based on their responses in the tool were offered genetic testing and counseling. We assessed overall agreement of family history collected in the tool compared with family history collected by the genetic counselors using Krippendorff's alpha (K-alpha). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess characteristics associated with inaccuracy.

Results

Most people (94%, n = 1711) who interacted with the tool completed it. Those included in the agreement analysis (n = 604) had a median age of 36.3 years, 81.6% were female, and 44.4% were Non-Hispanic White. Both the B-RST 3.0 and PREMM5 had moderate agreement: 69.9% (K-alpha = .40, 95% CI [0.32, 0.47]) and 83.9% (K-alpha = .52, 95% CI [0.43, 0.60]), respectively. Agreement was high (96%) for people with clinically significant risk for one of the hereditary cancer syndromes. For B-RST 3.0, the factors significantly associated with inaccuracy were study site, sex, and race/ethnicity. For PREMM5, age, sex, and education were associated with inaccuracy. Barriers to access were not associated with inaccuracy.

Conclusion

Implementation of this tool could increase identification of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes, including those with barriers to health care access.

Polygenic scores for longitudinal prediction of incident type 2 diabetes in an ancestrally and medically diverse primary care physician network: a patient cohort study

BACKGROUND

The clinical utility of genetic information for type 2 diabetes (T2D) prediction with polygenic scores (PGS) in ancestrally diverse, real-world US healthcare systems is unclear, especially for those at low clinical phenotypic risk for T2D.

METHODS

We tested the association of PGS with T2D incidence in patients followed within a primary care practice network over 16 years in four hypothetical scenarios that varied by clinical data availability (N = 14,712): (1) age and sex; (2) age, sex, body mass index (BMI), systolic blood pressure, and family history of T2D; (3) all variables in (2) and random glucose; and (4) all variables in (3), HDL, total cholesterol, and triglycerides, combined in a clinical risk score (CRS). To determine whether genetic effects differed by baseline clinical risk, we tested for interaction with the CRS.

RESULTS

PGS was associated with incident T2D in all models. Adjusting for age and sex only, the Hazard Ratio (HR) per PGS standard deviation (SD) was 1.76 (95% CI 1.68, 1.84) and the HR of top 5% of PGS vs interquartile range (IQR) was 2.80 (2.39, 3.28). Adjusting for the CRS, the HR per SD was 1.48 (1.40, 1.57) and HR of the top 5% of PGS vs IQR was 2.09 (1.72, 2.55). Genetic effects differed by baseline clinical risk ((PGS-CRS interaction p = 0.05; CRS below the median: HR 1.60 (1.43, 1.79); CRS above the median: HR 1.45 (1.35, 1.55)).

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic information can help identify high-risk patients even among those perceived to be low risk in a clinical evaluation.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of family cancer history collection tools in oncology clinical practices

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of family cancer history (FCH) collection tools in clinical practices and community settings by assessing clinicians' perceptions of implementing a chatbot interface to collect FCH information and provide personalized results to patients and providers.

OBJECTIVES

By identifying design and implementation features that facilitate tool adoption and integration into clinical workflows, this study can inform future FCH tool development and adoption in healthcare settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Quantitative data were collected using survey to evaluate the implementation outcomes of acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, and sustainability of the chatbot tool for collecting FCH. Semistructured interviews were conducted to gather qualitative data on respondents' experiences using the tool and recommendations for enhancements.

RESULTS

We completed data collection with 19 providers (n = 9, 47%), clinical staff (n = 5, 26%), administrators (n = 4, 21%), and other staff (n = 1, 5%) affiliated with the NCI Community Oncology Research Program. FCH was systematically collected using a wide range of tools at sites, with information being inserted into the patient's medical record. Participants found the chatbot tool to be highly acceptable, with the tool aligning with existing workflows, and were open to adopting the tool into their practice.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We further the evidence base about the appropriateness of scripted chatbots to support FCH collection. Although the tool had strong support, the varying clinical workflows across clinic sites necessitate that future FCH tool development accommodates customizable implementation strategies. Implementation support is necessary to overcome technical and logistical barriers to enhance the uptake of FCH tools in clinical practices and community settings.

Determinants of Breast Cancer Screening Adherence During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Cohort at Increased Inherited Cancer Risk in the United States

BACKGROUND

We examined neighborhood characteristics concerning breast cancer screening annual adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We analyzed 6673 female patients aged 40 or older at increased inherited cancer risk in 2 large health care systems (NYU Langone Health [NYULH] and the University of Utah Health [UHealth]). Multinomial models were used to identify predictors of mammogram screening groups (non-adherent, pre-pandemic adherent, pandemic period adherent) in comparison to adherent females. Potential determinants included sociodemographic characteristics and neighborhood factors.

RESULTS

Comparing each cancer group in reference to the adherent group, a reduced likelihood of being non-adherent was associated with older age (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95, 0.99), a greater number of relatives with cancer (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.86), and being seen at NYULH study site (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.60). More relatives with cancer were correlated with a lesser likelihood of being pandemic period adherent (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81, 0.97). A lower likelihood of being pre-pandemic adherent was seen in areas with less education (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.96) and NYULH study site (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.55). Finally, greater neighborhood deprivation (OR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.01) was associated with being non-adherent.

CONCLUSION

Breast screening during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with being older, having more relatives with cancer, residing in areas with less educational attainment, and being seen at NYULH; non-adherence was linked with greater neighborhood deprivation. These findings may mitigate risk of clinically important screening delays at times of disruptions in a population at greater risk for breast cancer.

Developing and assessing a kin keeping scale with application to identifying central influencers in African American family networks

Promoting family communication about inherited disease risk is an arena in which family systems theory is highly relevant. One family systems' construct that can support promotion of family communication regarding inherited disease risk is the notion of "kin keeping." However, kin keeping and whether it might be capitalized on to encourage family communication about inherited risk has been understudied. The goal of this report was to propose a broadened conceptualization of kin keeping that distinguishes between a structural functional perspective (role conceptualization) and transitional behaviors (skill conceptualization), and to develop and evaluate a scale that would enable this assertion to be tested among a sample of African American community health workers. We developed a scale using four steps: item development using concept analysis and content validity, scale development among a national sample (n = 312), scale evaluation using exploratory factor analysis (n = 52), and scale reduction. We then posed suppositions of associations that would indicate whether the developed kin keeping measure was assessing a specific family role or set of behaviors. Our results included the development of the first quantitative measure of kin keeping (9- and 15-item scales). Model fit for 9-item scale (CFI = 0.97, AFGI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.09, SMRM = 0.06) and model fit for 15-item scale (CFI = 0.97, AFGI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.06, SMRM = 0.05). These findings allow us to move toward more rigorous research about the role of kin keeping on information sharing and health decision making. Results also suggest that, contrary to the historical structural functional conceptualization of kin keeping as a role, kin keeping might also be conceptualized as a behavior or set of modifiable behaviors. Ultimately, the kin keeping scale could be used to operationalize kin keeping in various theoretical models and frameworks, guide intervention development to encourage or train for kin keeping behaviors, and test assumptions of whether families vary in the density of kin keeping.

Association Between a First-Degree Family History and Self-Reported Personal History of Obesity, Diabetes, and Heart and Blood Conditions: Results From the All of Us Research Program

BACKGROUND

Family history reflects the complex interplay of genetic susceptibility and shared environmental exposures and is an important risk factor for obesity, diabetes, and heart and blood conditions (ODHB). However, the overlap in family history associations between various ODHBs has not been quantified.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We assessed the association between a self-reported family history of ODHBs and their risk in the adult population (age ≥20 years) of the AoU (All of Us) Research Program, a longitudinal cohort study of diverse participants across the United States. We conducted a family history-wide association study to systematically assess the association of a first-degree family history of 15 ODHBs in AoU. We performed stratified analyses based on racial and ethnic categories, education, household income and gender minority status, and quantified associations by type of affected relatives. Of 125 430 participants, 76.8% reported a first-degree family history of any ODHB, most commonly hypertension (n=64 982, 51.8%), high cholesterol (49 753, 39.7%), and heart attack (29 618, 23.6%). We use the FamWAS method to estimate 225 familial associations among 15 ODHBs. The results include overlapping associations between family history of different types of cardiometabolic conditions (such as type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease), and their risk factors (obesity, hypertension), where adults with a family history of 1 ODHB exhibited 1.1 to 5.6 times (1.5, on average) the odds of having a different ODHB.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings inform the utility of family history data as a risk assessment and screening tool for the prevention of ODHBs and to provide additional insights into shared risk factors and pathogenic mechanisms.

Understanding the Process of Family Cancer History Collection and Health Information Seeking

PROBLEM ADDRESSED

To better understand the factors associated with family cancer history (FCH) information and cancer information seeking, we model the process an individual undergoes when assessing whether to gather FCH and seek cancer information and compare models by sociodemographics and family history of cancer. We used cross-sectional data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, Cycle 2) and variables (e.g., emotion and self-efficacy) associated with the Theory of Motivated Information Management to assess the process of FCH gathering and information seeking. We completed path analysis to assess the process of FCH gathering and stratified path models.

RESULTS

Those who felt they could lower their chances of getting cancer (emotion) were more confident in their ability to complete FCH on a medical form (self-efficacy; B = 0.11, p < .0001) and more likely to have discussed FCH with family members (B = 0.07, p < .0001). Those who were more confident in their ability to complete a summary of their family history on a medical form were more likely to have discussed FCH with family members (B = 0.34, p < .0001) and seek other health information (B = 0.24, p < .0001). Stratified models showed differences in this process by age, race/ethnicity, and family history of cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Tailoring outreach and education strategies to address differences in perceived ability to lower chances of getting cancer (emotion) and confidence in the ability to complete FCH (self-efficacy) could help encourage less engaged individuals to learn about their FCH and gather cancer information.

Polygenic Scores for Longitudinal Prediction of Incident Type 2 Diabetes in an Ancestrally and Medically Diverse Primary Care Network

OBJECTIVE

The clinical utility of genetic information for type 2 diabetes (T2D) prediction with polygenic score (PGS) in ancestrally diverse, real-world US healthcare systems is unclear, especially for those at low clinical phenotypic risk for T2D.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We tested the association of PGS with T2D incidence in patients followed within a primary care practice network over 16 years in four hypothetical scenarios that varied by clinical data availability (N = 14,712): 1) age and sex, 2) age, sex, BMI, systolic blood pressure, and family history of diabetes; 3) all variables in (2) and random glucose; 4) all variables in (3), HDL, total cholesterol, and triglycerides, combined in a clinical risk score (CRS). To determine whether genetic effects differed by baseline clinical risk, we tested for interaction with the CRS.

RESULTS

PGS was associated with incident diabetes in all models. Adjusting for age and sex only, the Hazard Ratio (HR) per PGS standard deviation (SD) was 1.76 (95% CI 1.68, 1.84) and the HR of top 5% of PGS vs interquartile range (IQR) was 2.80 (2.39, 3.28). Adjusting for the CRS, the HR per SD was 1.48 (1.40, 1.57) and HR of top 5% of PGS vs IQR was 2.09 (1.72, 2.55). Genetic effects differed by baseline clinical risk [(PGS-CRS interaction p =0.05; CRS below the median: HR 1.60 (1.43, 1.79); CRS above the median: HR 1.45 (1.35, 1.55)].

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic information can help identify high-risk patients even among those perceived to be low risk in a clinical evaluation.

Unawareness of breast cancer family history among African women

Introduction

comprehensive cancer risk assessment services are lacking in most sub-Saharan African countries and the use of accurate family history (FH) information could serve as a cheap strategy for risk evaluation. The aim of this study is to determine the proportion of women unaware of family history of cancer among female relatives and associated socio-demographic characteristics.

Methods

using case-control data on breast cancer among 4294 women in Nigeria, Uganda and Cameroon, we investigated the proportion of women unaware of family history of cancer among their female relatives. The association between participants' response to their awareness of female relatives' cancer history and socio-demographic characteristics was analysed according to case-control status, family side and distance of relation. Results: the proportion of women unaware if any relative had cancer was 33%, and was significantly higher among controls (43.2%) compared to 23.9% among cases (p<0.001) (Adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.51, 95% CI = 2.14 - 2.95). Age, education and marital status remained significantly associated with being unaware of FH among controls on multiple regression.

Conclusion

about a third of women interviewed did not know about cancer history in at least one of their female relatives. Efforts aimed at improving cancer awareness in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are needed. Our findings could be useful for future studies of cancer risk assessment in SSA.

Individual or familial diabetes in relation to eight cardiovascular diseases: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Diabetes is associated with increased risk of certain cardiovascular diseases, yet the causality remains to be determined. Meanwhile, given that first-degree relatives share 50% of genes, the effect of familial diabetes is also worthy of attention. Therefore, we sought to investigate the causal relations of individual or familial diabetes with eight cardiovascular diseases, including myocardial infarction, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, cardiac death, pulmonary embolism, transient ischemic attack, and ischemic stroke.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Applying two-sample Mendelian randomization, we selected instruments for genetic predisposition to individual or familial diabetes based on published genome-wide association studies. The primary analyses were conducted using the random-effects inverse-variance weighted method. We found that genetically predicted individual diabetes was causally associated with higher risks of myocardial infarction (odd ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.13; P < 0.0001), hypertension (OR = 1.08; 95% CI: 1.03-1.13; P = 0.0006), and ischemic stroke (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.05-1.15; P < 0.0001). Genetically predicted paternal diabetes could increase the risk of ischemic stroke (OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.04-1.30; P = 0.0061). Genetically predicted maternal diabetes could increase the risk of myocardial infarction (OR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.09-1.29; P = 0.0001). Genetically predicted siblings' diabetes was causally associated with higher risks of myocardial infarction (OR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08-1.27; P = 0.0001) and hypertension (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.06-1.34; P = 0.0036). No significant differences were observed in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study supports causal effects of not only individual but also familial diabetes on the development of cardiovascular diseases, which will help realize the potential effect of family history in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases.

Shared genetic and environmental etiology between substance use disorders and suicidal behavior

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated substantial associations between substance use disorders (SUD) and suicidal behavior. The current study empirically assesses the extent to which shared genetic and/or environmental factors contribute to associations between alcohol use disorders (AUD) or drug use disorders (DUD) and suicidal behavior, including attempts and death.

METHODS

The authors used Swedish national registry data, including medical, pharmacy, criminal, and death registrations, for a large cohort of twins, full siblings, and half siblings (N = 1 314 990) born 1960-1980 and followed through 2017. They conducted twin-sibling modeling of suicide attempt (SA) or suicide death (SD) with AUD and DUD to estimate genetic and environmental correlations between outcomes. Analyses were stratified by sex.

RESULTS

Genetic correlations between SA and SUD ranged from rA = 0.60-0.88; corresponding shared environmental correlations were rC = 0.42-0.89 but accounted for little overall variance; and unique environmental correlations were rE = 0.42-0.57. When replacing attempt with SD, genetic and shared environmental correlations with AUD and DUD were comparable (rA = 0.48-0.72, rC = 0.92-1.00), but were attenuated for unique environmental factors (rE = -0.01 to 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that shared genetic and unique environmental factors contribute to comorbidity of suicidal behavior and SUD, in conjunction with previously reported causal associations. Thus, each outcome should be considered an indicator of risk for the others. Opportunities for joint prevention and intervention, while limited by the polygenic nature of these outcomes, may be feasible considering moderate environmental correlations between SA and SUD.

Identification of individuals at high-risk for pancreatic cancer using a digital patient-input tool combining family cancer history screening and new-onset diabetes

Capturing family history might be a valuable tool for identification of individuals at increased risk of pancreatic cancer, which would allow enrollment into pancreatic surveillance programs. In addition, weight loss and concurrent new-onset diabetes may be utilized as an early marker for pancreatic cancer. This study evaluates the yield of combining family history and the Enriching New-Onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model to identify individuals who could benefit from pancreatic surveillance. A novel questionnaire and digital input tool was created that combined questions on family cancer history and criteria of the ENDPAC model. Individuals meeting ENDPAC criteria were enrolled directly in the high-risk pancreatic clinic. Individuals who met the criteria for a significant family history of cancer were offered referral to a genetic counselor. The questionnaire was completed by 453 patients. Of those, 25.8% (117/453) had significant familial risk factors. Eighteen individuals (15.4%) completed genetic testing previously, of whom five had a pathogenic variant. Thirty-four (29.9%) out of 117 individuals with a strong family history - flagged by the questionnaire - underwent genetic testing. Four (11.8%) of these patients harbored a pathogenic variant. Additionally, through cascade family testing, two siblings were found to carry pathogenic variants. Four (0.9%) of the 453 patients matched ENDPAC criteria. Two were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and the others were enrolled in the surveillance program. In conclusion, identification of high-risk individuals for pancreatic cancer can be achieved by combining family history screening and the ENDPAC model to facilitate referral to genetic counseling and high-risk clinics.

Are College Students Interested in Family Health History Education? A Large Needs Assessment Survey Study

Family health history (FHH) is an essential foundation for personalized disease prevention. As the incidence of early-onset chronic diseases is increasing among college students, it is important to provide them with the education required to learn about their FHH. This study aimed to assess college students' interest in receiving FHH education, preferred topics, and desired learning methods. We invited college students to complete an online survey from a large research-intensive university. A total of 2276 college students completed the survey. Nearly half of the participants self-identified as non-Hispanic white (45.5%). Slightly more than half of the sample (53.9%) were not interested in receiving FHH education mainly due to low prioritization. Among those who expressed interest in obtaining FHH education, the three most desired learning topics were the ability to interpret FHH information (76.1%), the application of FHH in disease prevention (72.0%), and FHH information collection strategies (63.6%). Computer-based learning (51.1%) was the most preferred educational method. Moreover, females, older individuals, those who have FHH in first-degree relatives, and participants who were members of racial and ethnic groups showed greater interests in receiving FHH education (ps < 0.05). Strategies to promote college students' awareness, collection, and use of FHH are needed.

Systematic comparison of family history and polygenic risk across 24 common diseases

Family history is the standard indirect measure of inherited susceptibility in clinical care, whereas polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have more recently demonstrated potential for more directly capturing genetic risk in many diseases. Few studies have systematically compared how these overlap and complement each other across common diseases. Within FinnGen (N = 306,418), we leverage family relationships, up to 50 years of nationwide registries, and genome-wide genotyping to examine the interplay of family history and genome-wide PRSs. We explore the dynamic for three types of family history across 24 common diseases: first- and second-degree family history and parental causes of death. Covering a large proportion of the burden of non-communicable diseases in adults, we show that family history and PRS are independent and not interchangeable measures, but instead provide complementary information on inherited disease susceptibility. The PRSs explained on average 10% of the effect of first-degree family history, and first-degree family history 3% of PRSs, and PRS effects were independent of both early- and late-onset family history. The PRS stratified the risk similarly in individuals with and without family history. In most diseases, including coronary artery disease, glaucoma, and type 2 diabetes, a positive family history with a high PRS was associated with a considerably elevated risk, whereas a low PRS compensated completely for the risk implied by positive family history. This study provides a catalogue of risk estimates for both family history of disease and PRSs and highlights opportunities for a more comprehensive way of assessing inherited disease risk across common diseases.

Barriers to family history collection among Spanish-speaking primary care patients: a BRIDGE qualitative study

Objectives

Family history is an important tool for assessing disease risk, and tailoring recommendations for screening and genetic services referral. This study explored barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients.

Methods

This qualitative study was conducted in two US healthcare systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical assistants, physicians, and interpreters with experience collecting family history for Spanish-speaking patients.

Results

The most common patient-level barrier was the perception that some Spanish-speaking patients had limited knowledge of family history. Interpersonal communication barriers related to dialectical differences and decisions about using formal interpreters vs. Spanish-speaking staff. Organizational barriers included time pressures related to using interpreters, and ad hoc workflow adaptations for Spanish-speaking patients that might leave gaps in family history collection.

Conclusions

This study identified multi-level barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients in primary care. Findings suggest that a key priority to enhance communication would be to standardize processes for working with interpreters.

Innovation

To improve communication with and care provided to Spanish-speaking patients, there is a need to increase healthcare provider awareness about implicit bias, to address ad hoc workflow adjustments within practice settings, to evaluate the need for professional interpreter services, and to improve digital tools to facilitate family history collection.

FHH Quick App Review: How Can a Quality Review Process Assist Primary Care Providers in Choosing a Family Health History App for Patient Care?

Family health history (FHH) is a data type serving risk assessment, diagnosis, research, and preventive health. Despite technological leaps in genomic variant detection, FHH remains the most accessible, least expensive, and most practical assessment tool for assessing risks attributable to genetic inheritance. The purpose of this manuscript is to outline a process to assist primary care professionals in choosing FHH digital tools for patient care based on the new ISO/TS 82304-2 Technical Specification (TS), which is a recently developed method to determine eHealth app quality. With a focus on eHealth in primary care, we applied the quality label concept to FHH, and how a primary care physician can quickly review the quality and reliability of an FHH app. Based on our review of the ISO TS’s 81 questions, we compiled a list of 25 questions that are recommended to be more succinct as an initial review. We call this process the FHH Quick App Review. Our ‘informative-only’ 25 questions do not produce a quality score, but a guide to complete an initial review of FHH apps. Most of the questions are straight from the ISO TS, some are modified or de novo. We believe the 25 questions are not only relevant to FHH app reviews but could also serve to aid app development and clinical implementation.

Use of family history taking for hereditary neoplastic syndromes screening in primary health care: A systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Although most neoplasms result from complex interactions between the individual's genome and the environment, a percentage of cases is particularly due to inherited alterations that confer a greater predisposition to the development of tumors. Hereditary Neoplastic Syndromes have a high psychosocial and economic burden, in addition to being characterized by an increased risk for one or more types of cancer, onset of malignancy at a young age, high risk of secondary malignancies, and occurrence in successive generations of the family. Personal and family history, as well as pedigree, may be useful resources to estimate the risk for developing cancer, especially in Primary Health Care settings.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and evaluate the evidence regarding the impact of using family history as a genomic technology for Hereditary Neoplastic Syndromes screening at Primary Health Care.

METHODS

This systematic review protocol was elaborated in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). We will include all observational as well as experimental study designs published up to end of July 2022, and studies covering the impact of family history on screening for Hereditary Neoplastic Syndromes in primary health care. Qualitative studies, as well as guidelines, reviews, and studies undertaken in hospitals, outpatient clinic, or medical environments will be excluded. Five databases will be searched, including MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and LILACS. Additional sources will also be retrieved, including Clinical trials.gov-NIH, The British Library, and Google Scholar. No restriction to language or date will be employed in the search strategy. Three investigators will select studies independently, perform data extraction, and conduct the critical appraisal of the risk of bias and overall quality of the selected studies according to their designs. Regarding data synthesis, the study characteristics will be summarized and presented in tables and results will be presented according to the study design. A qualitative synthesis of data will also be provided in this systematic review.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, this systematic review will be the first to identify and critically assess evidence regarding the impact of using family history as a genomic technology for Hereditary Neoplastic Syndromes screening in Primary Health Care settings worldwide. This study is expected to provide consistent evidence that will aid the primary care decision-makers regarding hereditary cancer screening, thus helping individuals and families at risk for cancer.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020166211.

Prevalence of Americans reporting a family history of cancer indicative of increased cancer risk: Estimates from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey

The collection and evaluation of family health history in a clinical setting presents an opportunity to discuss cancer risk, tailor cancer screening recommendations, and identify people with an increased risk of carrying a pathogenic variant who may benefit from referral to genetic counseling and testing. National recommendations for breast and colorectal cancer screening indicate that men and women who have a first-degree relative affected with these types of cancers may benefit from talking to a healthcare provider about starting screening at an earlier age and other options for cancer prevention. The prevalence of reporting a first-degree relative who had cancer was assessed among adult respondents of the 2015 National Health Interview Survey who had never had cancer themselves (n = 27,999). We found 35.6% of adults reported having at least one first-degree relative with cancer at any site. Significant differences in reporting a family history of cancer were observed by sex, age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and census region. Nearly 5% of women under age 50 and 2.5% of adults under age 50 had at least one first-degree relative with breast cancer or colorectal cancer, respectively. We estimated that 5.8% of women had a family history of breast or ovarian cancer that may indicate increased genetic risk. A third of U.S. adults who have never had cancer report a family history of cancer in a first-degree relative. This finding underscores the importance of using family history to inform discussions about cancer risk and screening options between healthcare providers and their patients.

Family history tools for primary care: A systematic review

Background

Many medical family history (FH) tools are available for various settings. Although FH tools can be a powerful health screening tool in primary care (PC), they are currently underused.

Objectives

This review explores the FH tools currently available for PC and evaluates their clinical performance.

Methods

Five databases were systematically searched until May 2021. Identified tools were evaluated on the following criteria: time-to-complete, integration with electronic health record (EMR) systems, patient administration, risk-assessment ability, evidence-based management recommendations, analytical and clinical validity and clinical utility.

Results

We identified 26 PC FH tools. Analytical and clinical validity was poorly reported and agreement between FH and gold standard was commonly inadequately reported and assessed. Sensitivity was acceptable; specificity was found in half of the reviewed tools to be poor. Most reviewed tools showed a capacity to successfully identify individuals with increased risk of disease (6.2–84.6% of high and/or moderate or increased risk individuals).

Conclusion

Despite the potential of FH tools to improve risk stratification of patients in PC, clinical performance of current tools remains limited as well as their integration in EMR systems. Twenty-one FH tools are designed to be self-administered by patients.

Adaptation and early implementation of the PREdiction model for gene mutations (PREMM5™) for lynch syndrome risk assessment in a diverse population

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited cause of colorectal and endometrial cancers. Identifying individuals at risk for LS without personal cancer history requires detailed collection and assessment of family health history. However, barriers exist to family health history collection, especially in historically underserved populations. To improve LS risk assessment in historically underserved populations, we adapted the provider-facing PREdiction Model for gene Mutations (PREMM5™ model), a validated LS risk assessment model, into a patient-facing electronic application through an iterative development process involving expert and patient stakeholders. We report on preliminary findings based on the first 500 individuals exposed to the adapted application in a primary care population enriched for low-literacy and low-resource patients. Major adaptations to the PREMM5™ provider module included reduction in reading level, addition of interactive literacy aids, incorporation of family history assessment for both maternal and paternal sides of the family, and inclusion of questions about individual relatives or small groups of relatives to reduce cognitive burden. In the first 500 individuals, 90% completed the PREMM5™ independently; of those, 94% did so in 5 min or less (ranged from 0.2 to 48.8 min). The patient-facing application was able to accurately classify 84% of patients as having clinically significant or not clinically significant LS risk. Our preliminary results suggest that in this diverse study population, most participants were able to rapidly, accurately, and independently complete an interactive application collecting family health history assessment that accurately assessed for Lynch syndrome risk.

Equity in Genomic Medicine

Since the completion of the Human Genome Project, considerable progress has been made in translating knowledge about the genetic basis of disease risk and treatment response into clinical services and public health interventions that have greater precision. It is anticipated that more precision approaches to early detection, prevention, and treatment will be developed and will enhance equity in healthcare and outcomes among disparity populations. Reduced access to genomic medicine research, clinical services, and public health interventions has the potential to exacerbate disparities in genomic medicine. The purpose of this article is to describe these challenges to equity in genomic medicine and identify opportunities and future directions for addressing these issues. Efforts are needed to enhance access to genomic medicine research, clinical services, and public health interventions, and additional research that examines the clinical utility of precision medicine among disparity populations should be prioritized to ensure equity in genomic medicine. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, Volume 23 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Factors Influencing Family Health History Collection among Young Adults: A Structural Equation Modeling

Family health history (FHH) can serve as an entry point for preventive medicine by providing risk estimations for many common health conditions. College is a critical time for young adults to begin to understand the value of FHH collection, and to establish healthy behaviors to prevent FHH-related diseases. This study seeks to develop an integrated theoretical framework to examine FHH collection behavior and associated factors among college students. A sample of 2670 college students with an average age of 21.1 years completed a web-based survey. Less than half (49.8%) reported actively seeking FHH information from their family members. Respondents’ knowledge about FHH were generally low. Structural equation modeling findings suggested an adequate model fit between our survey data and the proposed integrated theoretical framework. Respondents who were members of racial/ethnic minority groups exhibited higher levels of anxiety and intention to obtain FHH information but had lower confidence in their ability to gather FHH information than non-Hispanic White respondents. Therefore, educational programs designed to enhance the level of young adults’ FHH knowledge, efficacy, and behavior in FHH collection, and change subjective norms are critically needed in the future, especially for these who are members of racial/ethnic minority groups.

Comparison of a Focused Family Cancer History Questionnaire to Family History Documentation in the Electronic Medical Record

INTRODUCTION

Family health history can be a valuable indicator of risk to develop certain cancers. Unfortunately, patient self-reported family history often contains inaccuracies, which might change recommendations for cancer screening. We endeavored to understand the difference between a patient's self-reported family history and their electronic medical record (EMR) family history. One aim of this study was to determine if family history information contained in the EMR differs from patient-reported family history collected using a focused questionnaire.

METHODS

We created the Hereditary Cancer Questionnaire (HCQ) based on current guidelines and distributed to 314 patients in the Department of Family Medicine waiting room June 20 to August 1, 2018. The survey queried patients about specific cancers within their biological family to assess their risk of an inherited cancer syndrome. We used the questionnaire responses as a baseline when comparing family histories in the medical record.

RESULTS

Agreement between the EMR and the questionnaire data decreased as the patients' risk for familial cancer increased. Meaning that the more significant a patient's family cancer history, the less likely it was to be recorded accurately and consistently in the EMR. Patients with low-risk levels, or fewer instances of cancer in the family, had more consistencies between the EMR and the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that physicians often make recommendations on incomplete information that is in the EMR, patients might not receive individualized preventive care based on a more complete family cancer history. This is especially true for individuals with more complicated and significant family history of cancer. An improved method of collecting family history, including increasing patient engagement, may help to decrease this disparity.

Multigenerational health research using population-based linked databases: an international review

Family health history is a well-established risk factor for many health conditions but the systematic collection of health histories, particularly for multiple generations and multiple family members, can be challenging. Routinely-collected electronic databases in a select number of sites worldwide offer a powerful tool to conduct multigenerational health research for entire populations. At these sites, administrative and healthcare records are used to construct familial relationships and objectively-measured health histories. We review and synthesize published literature to compare the attributes of routinely-collected, linked databases for three European sites (Denmark, Norway, Sweden) and three non-European sites (Canadian province of Manitoba, Taiwan, Australian state of Western Australia) with the capability to conduct population-based multigenerational health research. Our review found that European sites primarily identified family structures using population registries, whereas non-European sites used health insurance registries (Manitoba and Taiwan) or linked data from multiple sources (Western Australia). Information on familial status was reported to be available as early as 1947 (Sweden); Taiwan had the fewest years of data available (1995 onwards). All centres reported near complete coverage of familial relationships for their population catchment regions. Challenges in working with these data include differentiating biological and legal relationships, establishing accurate familial linkages over time, and accurately identifying health conditions. This review provides important insights about the benefits and challenges of using routinely-collected, population-based linked databases for conducting population-based multigenerational health research, and identifies opportunities for future research within and across the data-intensive environments at these six sites.

Family Health History-Based Interventions: A Systematic Review of the Literature

CONTEXT

National efforts have advocated for the need to deliver family health history-based interventions to the lay public for more than a decade. Yet, the numbers, characteristics, and outcomes of such interventions are unknown. This first-of-its-kind systematic literature review examines the characteristics and effectiveness of the existing family health history-based interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The research team systematically searched peer-reviewed articles published between January 2003 and July 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 35 articles met the inclusion criteria. These studies assessed various behaviors, including family health history collection/communication with family members, family health history communication with healthcare providers, healthy diet adoption, physical activity level, uptake of medical screenings and genetic tests, and being proactive in healthcare matters. The average methodologic quality score of the studies was 9.9 (SD=1.6) of a theoretical range from 2 to 16.

CONCLUSIONS

Many family health history-based interventions exist to examine a variety of behaviors. Yet, there is room for improvement in methodology because few studies used a randomized or quasi-experimental design. In addition, most included studies did not report objective or longer-term outcome data to examine the effectiveness of family health history-based interventions.

Using a Chatbot to Assess Hereditary Cancer Risk

PURPOSE

We developed a Web-based chatbot (ItRunsInMyFamily.com) to help individuals collect their family health history (FHx) and determine their risk for hereditary cancer. The purpose of the current study was to assess the characteristics of users and identify opportunities to improve the FHx collection tool.

METHODS

During Family Health History Month (November 2019) we launched an FHx campaign using social media advertisements to raise awareness about hereditary cancers and encourage individuals in the general population to use ItRunsInMyFamily to collect their FHx. Through this campaign, we were able to gather information about users and identify opportunities to improve the tool.

RESULTS

We reached 14,140 users in November 2019 through online marketing campaigns-Facebook, Google, previous ItRuns users, and Web site marketing. Of those, 3,204 completed the full FHx assessment and received risk recommendations. The campaign targeted women between age 40 and 60 years. Users came from 3,783 counties around the United States, 48 unique cancers were reported among probands, and 79 unique cancers were reported among family members, an average of two and a half cancers per family.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that it is possible to gather FHx information at the population level, with high levels of engagement and interest in the topic. There is room for future enhancements and improvements to ItRunsInMyFamily to broaden its reach and encourage individuals to learn about and record their health information.

Formative Evaluation of the Families SHARE Disease Risk Tool among Low-Income African Americans

INTRODUCTION

Family Health Histories (FHH) have been endorsed by the surgeon general as a powerful yet underutilized tool for identifying individuals at risk for complex chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. FHH tools provide a mechanism for increasing communication about disease history and motivating behavior change to reduce disease risk. A critical gap in translation efforts includes a lack of research that adapts and evaluates tools for low-income, minority populations who experience disparities in chronic disease.

METHODS

This study is a formative mixed-methods evaluation of an evidence-based FHH intervention called "Families SHARE" among African Americans residing in low-income neighborhoods. Participants (N = 51) completed assessments before and 6 weeks after receiving the intervention, including surveys and focus groups. We evaluated (a) their use, understanding, and perceived value of the tool; (b) if the intervention led to increased intentions to adopt disease risk-reducing behaviors among those with heightened disease risk, given their FHH; and (c) acceptability of and recommendations for the tool.

RESULTS

The quantitative and qualitative data indicated that this population valued and used the tool, and it prompted communication about FHH with family, friends, and others. Receipt of the intervention resulted in mixed accuracy of their perceived disease risk, and it did not shift intentions to change health behaviors. Qualitative data provide insights for future iterations of the Families SHARE tool.

CONCLUSION

Families SHARE is an engaging FHH tool that can be further tailored to optimize its value and benefits for low-income African Americans.

Comparing models of delivery for cancer genetics services among patients receiving primary care who meet criteria for genetic evaluation in two healthcare systems: BRIDGE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Advances in genetics and sequencing technologies are enabling the identification of more individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility who could benefit from tailored screening and prevention recommendations. While cancer family history information is used in primary care settings to identify unaffected patients who could benefit from a cancer genetics evaluation, this information is underutilized. System-level population health management strategies are needed to assist health care systems in identifying patients who may benefit from genetic services. In addition, because of the limited number of trained genetics specialists and increasing patient volume, the development of innovative and sustainable approaches to delivering cancer genetic services is essential.

METHODS

We are conducting a randomized controlled trial, entitled Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE), to address these needs. The trial is comparing uptake of genetic counseling, uptake of genetic testing, and patient adherence to management recommendations for automated, patient-directed versus enhanced standard of care cancer genetics services delivery models. An algorithm-based system that utilizes structured cancer family history data available in the electronic health record (EHR) is used to identify unaffected patients who receive primary care at the study sites and meet current guidelines for cancer genetic testing. We are enrolling eligible patients at two healthcare systems (University of Utah Health and New York University Langone Health) through outreach to a randomly selected sample of 2780 eligible patients in the two sites, with 1:1 randomization to the genetic services delivery arms within sites. Study outcomes are assessed through genetics clinic records, EHR, and two follow-up questionnaires at 4 weeks and 12 months after last genetic counseling contactpre-test genetic counseling.

DISCUSSION

BRIDGE is being conducted in two healthcare systems with different clinical structures and patient populations. Innovative aspects of the trial include a randomized comparison of a chatbot-based genetic services delivery model to standard of care, as well as identification of at-risk individuals through a sustainable EHR-based system. The findings from the BRIDGE trial will advance the state of the science in identification of unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility and delivery of genetic services to those patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

BRIDGE is registered as NCT03985852 . The trial was registered on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov .

Exploring the Role of Community Health Workers in Improving the Collection of Family Health History: A Pilot Study

Community health workers (CHWs) have been successful partners in addressing public health and health care challenges but have yet to be engaged in efforts to promote family health history (FHH) collection. FHH information is a key factor in determining disease risk and supporting screening and prevention across multiple diseases. The collection of FHH information could be facilitated by the existing cadre of CHWs already working alongside clients and families. In this qualitative study, we interviewed 30 CHWs from Georgia to better understand the current level of knowledge about FHH, perceptions of how FHH collection aligns with their role, and barriers and facilitators in order to support more active involvement of CHWs in FHH collection. Interviews were completed, transcribed, and double coded by three study team members. More than half of CHWs reported knowing their own FHH information. CHWs showed a strong interest and support for collecting FHH in their job, despite limited current engagement in this role. CHWs acknowledged the collection of FHH as being an opportunity to empower clients to have conversations with their providers. To better support this work, CHWs requested training in using and integrating FHH tools into their workflow and support in communicating about FHH with their clients. Our findings suggest that with support and training, CHWs are uniquely positioned to improve FHH collection among their client base. Ultimately, improving FHH collection skills among the population could allow for better integration of risk-stratified approaches that are informed by FHH information for the prevention, management, and treatment of disease.

Modernizing family health history: achievable strategies to reduce implementation gaps

Family health history (FHH) is a valuable yet underused healthcare tool for assessing health risks for both prevalent disorders like diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular diseases, and for rare, monogenic disorders. Full implementation of FHH collection and analysis in healthcare could improve both primary and secondary disease prevention for individuals and, through cascade testing, make at risk family members eligible for pre-symptomatic testing and preventative interventions. In addition to risk assessment in the clinic, FHH is increasingly important for interpreting clinical genetic testing results and for research connecting health risks to genomic variation. Despite this value, diverse implementation gaps in clinical settings undermine its potential clinical value and limit the quality of connected health and genomic data. The NHGRI Family Health History Group, an open-membership, US-based group with international members, believes that integrating FHH in healthcare and research is more important than ever, and that achievable implementation advances, including education, are urgently needed to boost the pace of translational utility in genomic medicine. An inventory of implementation gaps and proposed achievable strategies to address them, representing a consensus developed in meetings from 2019-2020, is presented here. The proposed measures are diverse, interdisciplinary, and are guided by experience and ongoing implementation and research efforts.

Cases in Precision Medicine: Genetic Testing to Predict Future Risk for Disease in a Healthy Patient

Genetic testing is performed more routinely in clinical practice, and direct-to-consumer tests are widely available. It has obvious appeal as a preventive health measure. Clinicians and their healthy patients increasingly inquire about genetic testing as a tool for predicting diseases, such as cancer, heart disease, or dementia. Despite demonstrated utility for diagnosis in the setting of many diseases, genetic testing still has many limitations as a predictive tool for healthy persons. This article uses a hypothetical case to review key considerations for predictive genetic testing.

Family Health History-Based Cancer Prevention Training for Community Health Workers

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the U.S. Utilizing family health history in cancer prevention holds promise in lessening the burden of cancer. Nevertheless, family health history is underutilized in public health and preventive medicine. Community health workers, also known as lay health educators, are ideal candidates to offer basic cancer family history-based education and services to the general public. The authors developed the first cancer family history-based genomics training program in cancer prevention tailored for community health workers. This paper details the development and pilot testing findings of the training. Specifically, a multidisciplinary research team of geneticists, genetic counselors, health educators, community health workers, and community health worker instructors developed a 7-module, 6-hour, bilingual (English and Spanish) cancer family history-based training focusing on cancer family history-based risk assessment, lifestyle recommendations, and genetic evaluation and testing. The curriculum was based on an integrated theoretical framework, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, the community health worker core competencies, and the 4MAT instructional model. The Texas Department of State Health Services approved and certified the curriculum with 2 delivery formats: in-person/face-to-face workshops and online training. A total of 34 community health workers completed the pilot training in person (n=17) and online (n=17) in 2018 and 2019. Participating community health workers' knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and intention in delivering basic cancer family history-based genomics education and services significantly increased on the immediate post-test measures compared with their pretest data. Positive ratings and feedback were also reported by the community health workers. Findings from this pilot study suggest that wider training is warranted for educating more community health workers in the U.S.

Vitamin D status and risk of type 2 diabetes in the Norwegian HUNT cohort study: does family history or genetic predisposition modify the association?

INTRODUCTION

We sought to investigate the relationship between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) level and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in adults who participated in the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT), and the possible effect modification by family history and genetic predisposition.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This prospective study included 3574 diabetes-free adults at baseline who participated in the HUNT2 (1995-1997) and HUNT3 (2006-2008) surveys. Serum 25(OH)D levels were determined at baseline and classified as <50 and ≥50 nmol/L. Family history of diabetes was defined as self-reported diabetes among parents and siblings. A Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) for T2DM based on 166 single-nucleotide polymorphisms was generated. Incident T2DM was defined by self-report and/or non-fasting glucose levels greater than 11 mmol/L and serum glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody level of <0.08 antibody index at the follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression models were applied to calculate adjusted ORs with 95% CIs. Effect modification by family history or PRS was assessed by likelihood ratio test (LRT).

RESULTS

Over 11 years of follow-up, 92 (2.6%) participants developed T2DM. A higher risk of incident T2DM was observed in participants with serum 25(OH)D level of<50 nmol/L compared with those of ≥50 nmol/L (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.86). Level of 25(OH)D<50 nmol/L was associated with an increased risk of T2DM in adults without family history of diabetes (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.62 to 9.24) but not in those with a family history (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.62, p value for LRT=0.003). There was no effect modification by PRS (p value for LRT>0.23).

CONCLUSION

Serum 25(OH)D<50 nmol/L was associated with an increased risk of T2DM in Norwegian adults. The inverse association was modified by family history of diabetes but not by genetic predisposition to T2DM.

Advanced paternal age and risk of cancer in offspring

Many risk factors of cancer have been established, but the contribution of paternal age in this regard remains largely unexplored. To further understand the etiology of cancer, we investigated the relationship between paternal age and cancer incidence using PLCO cohort. Cox proportional hazards models were performed to assess the association between paternal age and the risk of cancers. During follow-up time (median 11.5 years), 18,753 primary cancers occurred. Paternal age was associated with reduced risk of cancers of the female genitalia (HR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.66-0.94; P = 0.008) as well as cancers of the respiratory and intrathoracic organs (HR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.63-0.97; P = 0.026). The association was stronger for lung cancer (HR, 0.67; 95%CI, 0.52-0.86; P = 0.002). The subgroup analysis suggested that age, gender, smoking and BMI were related to the decreased cancer incidence of the respiratory and intrathoracic organs, lung and the female genitalia. Positive linear associations were observed between paternal age and cancer incidence of the female genitalia, respiratory and intrathoracic organs and the lungs. These findings indicate that advanced paternal age is an independent protective factor against various cancers in offspring.

Survey of palliative care providers' needs, perceived roles, and ethical concerns about addressing cancer family history at the end of life

OBJECTIVE

Palliative care providers may face questions from patients and relatives regarding the heritability of cancers. Implications of such discussions for providers have been little explored. This study aimed to gather palliative care providers' views on their main needs, roles, and ethical concerns regarding cancer family history discussions.

METHOD

The palliative care providers who participated in the 2015 and 2017 annual meetings of the Quebec Palliative Care Association were approached to complete a web-based questionnaire. Study participants answered the questionnaire between November 2016 and July 2017. They were asked to identify the most facilitating factor for cancer family history discussions, as well as their most important knowledge needs, potential role, and ethical concerns. Descriptive analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Ninety-four palliative care providers answered the questionnaire. Access to specialized resources to obtain information and protocols or guidelines were considered the most facilitating factors for cancer family history discussions by 32% and 20% of providers, respectively. Knowledge of hereditary cancers was the most relevant educational need for 53%. Thirty-eight per cent considered essential to be informed about their rights and duties regarding cancer family history discussions. Being attentive to patients' concerns and referring families to appropriate resources were identified as the most relevant roles for palliative care providers by 47% and 34% of respondents, respectively. Fifty-eight per cent agreed that cancer family history discussions should be initiated only if beneficial to family members.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Education on hereditary cancers made consensus among palliative care providers as the most important knowledge need regarding discussing cancer family history at the end of life. Nonetheless, other less commonly expressed needs, including access to genetics specialists, protocols, or guidelines, and awareness of provider rights and duties concerning such discussions, deserve attention. Answering providers' needs might help optimize cancer predisposition management in palliative care.

Identificação de doenças genéticas na Atenção Primária à Saúde

Problema: Embora individualmente raras, somadas, as doenças genéticas têm prevalência global estimada de 31,5 a 73,0 por 1.000 indivíduos. Além disto, doenças genéticas e defeitos congênitos representam a segunda causa de mortalidade infantil no Brasil. Diante deste cenário, foi instituída a Política Nacional de Atenção Integral às Pessoas com Doenças Raras no Sistema Único de Saúde. Esta política prevê funções específicas para Atenção Primária à Saúde (APS) que incluem diagnóstico precoce e mapeamento de pessoas com ou sob-risco de desenvolver doenças genéticas raras e/ou defeitos congênitos para encaminhamento regulado. Essa experiência objetivou colaborar com o desenvolvimento de métodos para o reconhecimento de indivíduos com ou sob-risco de desenvolver doenças genéticas na APS. Métodos: Através de visitas domiciliares e por meio do preenchimento de uma ficha específica, realizou-se busca ativa de casos de doença genética e/ou defeito congênito em uma amostra probabilística aleatória, representativa de uma Unidade de Saúde da Família de um município brasileiro de porte médio. Resultados: Foram investigados 295 domicílios, totalizando 1.160 indivíduos e 238 casais. A média de filhos por casal foi de 2,7, a frequência de consanguinidade foi 3,8% e de abortamento espontâneo foi 8,7%. Foram identificadas 29 pessoas (2,5%) com doenças congênitas, 11 (0,9%) com deficiências auditivas, 10 (0,9%) com deficiência mental e 6 (0,5%) com déficits visuais importantes. Atraso no desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor foi relatado em 8,8% das crianças e adolescentes. Doze indivíduos (1%) possuíam câncer e 9,6% relataram história familiar positiva para câncer. Conclusão: Os profissionais da APS estão em posição privilegiada para identificar e organizar uma rede de cuidados para indivíduos com doenças genéticas e/ou defeitos congênitos. A utilização sistemática de instrumentos que facilitem o reconhecimento de fatores de risco e de situações suspeitas pode ser uma estratégia útil a ser incorporada pela APS.

Relationships of Family History-related Factors and Causal Beliefs to Cancer Risk Perception and Mammography Screening Adherence Among Medically Underserved Women

This study examines how family history-related factors and causal beliefs affect underserved women's cancer risk perceptions and adherence to mammography. 1,010 patients at a primary care safety net clinic at a large urban hospital completed a survey in 2015. Of the 1,010 patients, 467 women 45 years of age or older were included in this analysis. The majority of participants were African American (68%). We built multivariable linear and logistic regression models to examine the dependent variables of cancer risk perception and mammography screening adherence. According to the results, those with a family history of cancer were significantly more likely to be adherent to mammography. Perceived importance of family health history also significantly predicted their mammography screening adherence. However, cancer risk perceptions did not predict underserved women's mammography adherence. Significant interaction effects on the associations 1) between family cancer history, cancer risk perceptions, and mammography screening adherence and 2) between race, behavioral causal beliefs, and risk perceptions were found. Findings suggest that implementing different strategies across racial groups and by cancer history may be necessary to promote regular mammography screening.

The enduring importance of family health history in the era of genomic medicine and risk assessment

Improving disease risk prediction and tailoring preventive interventions to patient risk factors is one of the primary goals of precision medicine. Family health history is the traditional approach to quickly gather genetic and environmental data relevant to the patient. While the utility of family health history is well-documented, its utilization is variable, in part due to lack of patient and provider knowledge and incomplete or inaccurate data. With the advances and reduced costs of sequencing technologies, comprehensive sequencing tests can be performed as a risk assessment tool. We provide an overview of each of these risk assessment approaches, the benefits and limitations and implementation challenges.

Applying theory to characterize impediments to dissemination of community-facing family health history tools: a review of the literature

Uptake of community-facing family health history (FHH) tools to identify those at highest risk of disease and target prevention efforts has been consistently low. This review uses the diffusion of innovations (DOI) as a framework to organize the FHH evidence base and identify potential strategies to improve uptake of community-facing FHH tools. Methods for this literature review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We completed systematic searches in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies from 2009 to 2017 and hand searched bibliographies of relevant literature to identify additional articles. We abstracted and synthesized results, which were then organized by the DOI including the innovation-decision making process and characteristics of the innovation likely to influence diffusion (e.g., compatibility, relative advantage, complexity, trialability, observa/bility). Of the 290 unique articles identified, 65 were eligible for full-text review after title and abstract screening; a total of 27 were included in the final abstraction. Eleven unique tools were identified. The most commonly used tool was the Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait (n =9/27). Only six studies directly evaluated participant perceptions shown to be associated with tool uptake. Studies tended to focus on improving compatibility by customizing tools to the target population's needs and use of educational interventions. Results from this review suggest the need to evaluate strategies to increase the pace of uptake of community-facing FHH tools. These include pragmatic trials that compare different approaches to engage and evaluate participant perceptions of the relative advantage and complexity of tools. Ancillary support strategies may include collaborations with community networks to facilitate use and implementation study designs for rigorous evaluation.

How genomic information is accessed in clinical practice: an electronic survey of UK general practitioners

Genomic technologies are having an increasing impact across medicine, including primary care. To enable their wider adoption and realize their potential, education of primary health-care practitioners will be required. To enable the development of such resources, understanding where GPs currently access genomic information is needed. One-hundred fifty-nine UK GPs completed the survey in response to an open invitation, between September 2017 and September 2018. Questions were in response to 4 clinical genomic scenarios, with further questions exploring resources used for rare disease patients, direct-to-consumer genetic testing and collecting a family history. Respondents were most commonly GP principals (independent GPs who own their clinic) (64.8%), aged 35-49 years (54%), worked as a GP for more than 15 years (44%) and practiced within suburban locations (typically wealthier) (50.3%). The most popular 'just in time' education source for all clinical genomic scenarios were online primary care focussed resources with general Internet search engines also popular. For genomic continuous medical education, over 70% of respondents preferred online learning. Considering specific scenarios, local guidelines were a popular resource for the familial breast cancer scenario. A large proportion (41%) had not heard of Genomics England's 100,000 genome project. Few respondents (4%) would access rare disease specific Internet resources (Orphanet, OMIM). Twenty-five percent of respondents were unsure how to respond to a direct-to-consumer commercial genetic test query, with 41% forwarding such queries to local genetic services. GPs require concise, relevant, primary care focussed resources in trusted and familiar online repositories of information. Inadequate genetic education of GPs could increase burden on local genetic services.

All things considered, my risk for diabetes is medium: A risk personalization process of familial risk for type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

A positive family history of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has been associated with risk awareness and risk-reducing behaviours among the unaffected relatives. Yet, little is known about how people with a positive family history for diabetes develop and manage their personal sense of risk.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize two key concepts, salience and vulnerability, within the familial risk perception (FRP) model among unaffected individuals, at increased familial risk for T2D.

DESIGN

We conducted a mixed method study. Descriptions of salience and vulnerability were collected through semi-structured interviews. Participant's perception of self-reported risk factors (family history, age, race/ethnicity, medical history, weight and exercise) was measured using the Perceived Risk Factors for T2D Tool and was compared to a clinical evaluation of the same risk factors.

RESULTS

We identified two components of salience: (a) concern for developing T2D and (b) risk awareness triggers, and two features of vulnerability: (a) statement of risk and (b) risk assessment devices. Although few participants (26%) were concordant between their perceived and clinical overall T2D risk, concordance for individual risk factors was higher, ranging from 42% (medical history) to 90% (family history).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Both familial and non-familial events lead people to contemplate their T2D risk, even among people who have a positive family history. Participants often downplayed their overall risk and underestimated their overall risk compared to a clinical risk assessment of the same self-reported risk factors. Clinicians could leverage key components of the FRP process as way to engage patients in risk reduction strategies earlier.