Getting to the point: what women newly diagnosed with breast cancer want to know about treatment-focused genetic testing

Consumer-oriented (patient and family) outcomes from nursing in genomics: a scoping review of the literature (2012-2022)

Introduction

Genomics is a lifespan competency that is important for improving health outcomes for individuals, families, and communities. Nurses play a key role in genomic healthcare and realizing the potential of the genomic era.

Methods

We aimed to chart the current state of genomics in nursing by conducting a systematic scoping review of the literature in four databases (2012-2022). We categorized included articles using the Cochrane Collaboration outcome domains/sub-domains and identify key topical areas.

Results

Of 8532 retrieved articles, we identified 67 articles on 'consumer-oriented outcomes' (patient and family) for analysis. Identified articles primarily centered on themes of genetic testing and screening. Most studies reported non-interventional studies 39/67 (58%) and more than half were from the U.S.A. 34/67 (51%). Six of nine subdomains were reported on. The "patient involvement in care" subdomain was the most commonly reported subdomain (17/67, 25%) while "treatment outcomes" had the fewest reports (5/67, 8%). Overall, consumers (i.e., patients and families) had high satisfaction with nurse-led interventions.

Discussion

Synthesizing findings revealed key knowledge gaps and unmet patient informational needs around genetic testing and decision support. There are opportunities for interprofessional collaboration between nursing and genetic counseling to meet the mounting demand for genomic healthcare and develop more person-centered approaches to genetic counseling and decisional support. Findings support the need for interventional studies and enhanced focus on implementation for nurses to improve consumer-oriented outcomes.

Current State of Genomics in Nursing: A Scoping Review of Healthcare Provider Oriented (Clinical and Educational) Outcomes (2012-2022)

In the 20 years since the initial sequencing of the human genome, genomics has become increasingly relevant to nursing. We sought to chart the current state of genomics in nursing by conducting a systematic scoping review of the literature in four databases (2012-2022). The included articles were categorized according to the Cochrane Collaboration outcome domains/sub-domains, and thematic analysis was employed to identify key topical areas to summarize the state of the science. Of 8532 retrieved articles, we identified 232 eligible articles. The articles primarily reported descriptive studies from the United States and other high-income countries (191/232, 82%). More than half (126/232, 54.3%) aligned with the "healthcare provider oriented outcomes" outcome domain. Three times as many articles related to the "knowledge and understanding" sub-domain compared to the "consultation process" subdomain (96 vs. 30). Five key areas of focus were identified, including "nursing practice" (50/126, 40%), "genetic counseling and screening" (29/126, 23%), "specialist nursing" (21/126, 17%), "nurse preparatory education" (17/126, 13%), and "pharmacogenomics" (9/126, 7%). Only 42/126 (33%) articles reported interventional studies. To further integrate genomics into nursing, study findings indicate there is a need to move beyond descriptive work on knowledge and understanding to focus on interventional studies and implementation of genomics into nursing practice.

Patient decision support resources inform decisions about cancer susceptibility genetic testing and risk management: a systematic review of patient impact and experience

Background

Patients with genetic cancer susceptibility are presented with complex management options involving difficult decisions, for example about genetic testing, treatment, screening and risk-reducing surgery/medications. This review sought to explore the experience of patients using decision support resources in this context, and the impact on decision-making outcomes.

Methods

Systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies involving adults with or without cancer who used a decision support resource pre- or post-genetic test for any cancer susceptibility. To gather a broad view of existing resources and gaps for development, digital or paper-based patient resources were included and not limited to decision aids. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise patient impact and experience.

Results

Thirty-six publications describing 27 resources were included. Heterogeneity of resources and outcome measurements highlighted the multiple modes of resource delivery and personal tailoring acceptable to and valued by patients. Impact on cognitive, emotional, and behavioural outcomes was mixed, but mainly positive. Findings suggested clear potential for quality patient-facing resources to be acceptable and useful.

Conclusions

Decision support resources about genetic cancer susceptibility are likely useful to support decision-making, but should be co-designed with patients according to evidence-based frameworks. More research is needed to study impact and outcomes, particularly in terms of longer term follow-up to identify whether patients follow through on decisions and whether any increased distress is transient. Innovative, streamlined resources are needed to scale up delivery of genetic cancer susceptibility testing for patients with cancer in mainstream oncology clinics. Tailored patient-facing decision aids should also be made available to patients identified as carriers of a pathogenic gene variant that increases future cancer risks, to complement traditional genetic counselling.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020220460, identifier: CRD42020220460.

Understanding the Information Needs of Patients With Ovarian Cancer Regarding Genetic Testing to Inform Intervention Design: Interview Study

Background

Experts in gynecological cancer care recommend that all patients with invasive or high-grade ovarian cancer (OC) undergo genetic testing. However, even patients who intend to take or have taken genetic tests have many unaddressed information needs regarding genetic testing. Existing genetic counseling falls short of adequately addressing this challenge.

Objective

This study aims to investigate the genetic testing–related information needs of patients with OC to inform the design of interactive technology-based interventions that can enhance communication of genetic testing information to patients.

Methods

We interviewed 20 patients with OC who had taken genetic tests and gathered genetic testing–related messages from an active OC web-based community. The interview transcripts and web-based community messages were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis method.

Results

Data analyses produced a comprehensive taxonomy of the genetic testing–related information needs of patients with OC, which included five major topic clusters: knowledge of genetic testing as a medical test, genetic testing process, genetic testing implications for patients, implications for family members, and medical terminology. Findings indicated that patients wanted to receive information that was relevant, understandable, concise, usable, appropriate, sympathetic, and available when needed. They also preferred various channels to receive information, including internet-based technologies, print, and conversations with health care providers.

Conclusions

Patients with OC need a range of information to address the uncertainties and challenges that they encounter while taking genetic tests. Their preferences for channels to receive information vary widely. A multichannel information delivery solution that combines both provider-led and peer-to-peer education models is needed to supplement existing genetic counseling to effectively meet the genetic testing–related information needs of patients with OC.

Pilot study of an online training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in oncology healthcare professionals discussing BRCA1/2 genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients

The increasing use of genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other pathogenic variants in the management of women with breast and ovarian cancer necessitates increased genetic literacy in oncology healthcare professionals. This pilot study aimed to evaluate an online training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in Australian oncology healthcare professionals tasked with discussing and coordinating mainstream genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients. A training website with embedded videos was developed. This study assesses the website’s acceptability and user-friendliness; suggestions for improvement were also elicited. Oncology healthcare professionals were recruited through relevant professional organisations, invited to the study by email, asked to work through the website and then complete an online questionnaire. Thirty-two oncology healthcare professionals completed the questionnaire after viewing the website. Nearly all participants were satisfied with the information contained in the program (very satisfied: n = 14/32, 44%, satisfied: n = 17/32, 53%, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied: n = 1/32, 3%) and reported that they had gained new skills (n = 29/32, 91%) and had increased confidence (n = 29/31, 94%) in communicating with breast and ovarian cancer patients about genetic testing. More than 93% (28/30) of participants endorsed the online program as clearly presented, informative, relevant and useful. This pilot study demonstrated high feasibility and acceptability of the training program to increase genetic literacy and communication skills in oncology healthcare professionals discussing genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients. Further evidence from a randomised trial is needed to evaluate effects on changing clinical practice, improving patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.

What men want: Qualitative analysis of what men with prostate cancer (PCa) want to learn regarding genetic referral, counseling, and testing

BACKGROUND

Guidelines have changed recently to include genetic counseling (GC) and/or genetic testing (GT) for all men with aggressive prostate cancer (PCa). This study aimed to identify what information men with PCa desire before and from GC.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with men who have PCa. Audio recordings were analyzed for themes related to GT, the information they desired from health care providers, and implications for family members.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven men with PCa participated in seven focus groups. Nearly all men felt GT was beneficial and impactful for their family and themselves. Most men were unaware of the risks to female relatives associated with hereditary cancer. Participants discussed that genetics should be incorporated at an appropriate time of their diagnostic journey.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that men valued GC and GT for personal and familial implications, and often did not associate PCa genetics with risk for female relatives to develop cancer. Consideration should be given to the GC timing in regard to where men are in their treatment process. Providers referring patients can leverage patient motivations and utilize their relationship with the patient to determine the appropriate timing and personalize discussion with the patient regarding GC and GT.

Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review

Genetic testing of patients with cancer is increasingly offered to guide management, resulting in a growing need for oncology health professionals to communicate genetics information and facilitate informed decision-making in a short time frame. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise what is known about health professionals' communication about genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with cancer patients. Four databases were systematically searched using a recognised scoping review method. Areas and types of research were mapped and a narrative synthesis of the findings was undertaken. Twenty-nine papers from 25 studies were included. Studies were identified about (i) information needs, (ii) process and content of genetic counselling, (iii) cognitive and emotional impact, including risk perception and recall, understanding and interpretation of genetic test results, and anxiety and distress, (iv) patients' experiences, (v) communication shortly after diagnosis and (vi) alternatives to face-to-face genetic counselling. Patients' need for cancer-focused, personalised information is not always met by genetic counselling. Genetic counselling tends to focus on biomedical information at the expense of psychological support. For most patients, knowledge is increased and anxiety is not raised by pre-test communication. However, some patients experience anxiety and distress when results are disclosed, particularly those tested shortly after diagnosis who are unprepared or unsupported. For many patients, pre-test communication by methods other than face-to-face genetic counselling is acceptable. Research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from genetic counselling and support and to investigate communication about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer by oncology health professionals.

Patients' Views of Treatment-Focused Genetic Testing (TFGT): Some Lessons for the Mainstreaming of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing

This paper explores patients' views and experiences of undergoing treatment-focused BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing (TFGT), either offered following triaging to clinical genetics (breast cancer) or as part of a mainstreamed care pathway in oncology (ovarian cancer). Drawing on 26 in-depth interviews with patients with breast or ovarian cancer who had undergone TFGT, this retrospective study examines patients' views of genetic testing at this point in their care pathway, focusing on issues, such as initial response to the offer of testing, motivations for undergoing testing, and views on care pathways. Patients were amenable to the incorporation of TFGT at an early stage in their cancer care irrespective of (any) prior anticipation of having a genetic test or family history. While patients were glad to have been offered TFGT as part of their care, some questioned the logic of the test's timing in relation to their cancer treatment. Crucially, patients appeared unable to disentangle the treatment role of TFGT from its preventative function for self and other family members, suggesting that some may undergo TFGT to obtain information for others rather than for self.

Systematic review of the empirical investigation of resources to support decision-making regarding BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in women with breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Identify existing resources developed and/or evaluated empirically in the published literature designed to support women with breast cancer making decisions regarding genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations.

METHODS

Systematic review of seven electronic databases. Studies were included if they described or evaluated resources that were designed to support women with breast cancer in making a decision to have genetic counselling or testing for familial breast cancer. Outcome and process evaluations, using any type of study design, as well as articles reporting the development of decision aids, were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Total of 9 publications, describing 6 resources were identified. Resources were effective at increasing knowledge or understanding of hereditary breast cancer. Satisfaction with resources was high. There was no evidence that any resource increased distress, worry or decisional conflict. Few resources included active functionalities for example, values-based exercises, to support decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Tailored resources supporting decision-making may be helpful and valued by patients and increase knowledge of hereditary breast cancer, without causing additional distress.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians should provide supportive written information to patients where it is available. However, there is a need for robustly developed decision tools to support decision-making around genetic testing in women with breast cancer.

Genetic testing in women with breast cancer: implications for treatment

INTRODUCTION

Mutations in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes are responsible for approximately 42,000 cases of breast cancer annually. Identifying these germline mutations in a woman with breast cancer is important because it can influence her immediate and long-term management and has important implications for other family members. Areas covered: This review highlights how treatment-focussed genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations can potentially influence cancer treatment and secondary prevention decisions in women with breast cancer. Expert commentary: Testing women with breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations has the potential to decrease cancer burden and improve cancer outcomes. It can help optimise surgical and systemic therapy approaches. Clinicians should actively consider whether genetic testing is appropriate for each woman with breast cancer, and if so should instigate it early in the treatment trajectory when it can most influence cancer care.

Key messages for communicating information about BRCA1 and BRCA2 to women with breast or ovarian cancer: Consensus across health professionals and service users

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing of cancer predisposing genes will increasingly be needed in oncology clinics to target cancer treatment. This Delphi study aimed to identify areas of agreement and disagreement between genetics and oncology health professionals and service users about the key messages required by women with breast/ovarian cancer who undergo BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing and the optimal timing of communicating key messages.

METHODS

Participants were 16 expert health professionals specialising in oncology/genetics and 16 service users with breast/ovarian cancer and a pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 variant. Online questionnaires containing 53 inductively developed information messages were circulated to the groups separately. Participants rated each message as key/not key on a Likert scale and suggested additional messages. Questionnaires were modified according to the feedback and up to 3 rounds were circulated. Consensus was reached when there was ≥75% agreement.

RESULTS

Thirty key messages were agreed by both groups with 7 of the key messages agreed by ≥95% of participants: dominant inheritance, the availability of predictive testing, the importance of pretest discussion, increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer, and the option of risk-reducing mastectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Both groups agreed that key messages should be communicated before genetic testing and once a pathogenic variant has been identified.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high level of agreement within and between the groups about the information requirements of women with breast/ovarian cancer about BRCA1/BRCA2. These key messages will be helpful in developing new approaches to the delivery of information as genetic testing becomes further integrated into mainstream oncology services.

How, who, and when: preferences for delivery of genome sequencing results among women diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age

Background

The increasing use of genome sequencing with patients raises a critical communication challenge: return of secondary findings. While the issue of what sequencing results should be returned to patients has been examined, much less attention has been paid to developing strategies to return these results in ways that meet patients' needs and preferences. To address this, we investigated delivery preferences (i.e., who, how, when) for individual genome sequencing results among women diagnosed with breast cancer at age 40 or younger.

Methods

We conducted 60 semistructured, in‐person individual interviews to examine preferences for the return of different types of genome sequencing results and the reasons underlying these preferences. Two coders independently coded interview transcripts; analysis was conducted using NVivo 10.

Results

The major findings from the study were that: (1) many participants wanted sequencing results as soon as possible, even at the time of breast cancer diagnosis; (2) participants wanted an opportunity for an in‐person discussion of results; and (3) they put less emphasis on the type of person delivering results than on the knowledge and communicative skills of that person. Participants also emphasized the importance of a results return process tailored to a patient's individual circumstances and one that she has a voice in determining.

Conclusions

A critical goal for future transdisciplinary research including clinicians, patients, and communication researchers may be to develop decision‐making processes to help patients make decisions about how they would like various sequencing results returned.

While the issue of what genome sequencing results should be returned to patients has been examined, much less attention has been paid to developing strategies to return these results in ways that meet patients' needs and preferences. To address this, we investigated delivery preferences (i.e., who, how, when) for individual genome sequencing results among women diagnosed with breast cancer at age 40 or younger. The major findings from the study were that: (1) many participants wanted sequencing results as soon as possible, even at the time of breast cancer diagnosis; (2) participants wanted an opportunity for an in‐person discussion of results; and (3) they put less emphasis on the type of person delivering results than on the knowledge and communicative skills of that person.

Streamlined genetic education is effective in preparing women newly diagnosed with breast cancer for decision making about treatment-focused genetic testing: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial

PURPOSE

Increasingly, women newly diagnosed with breast cancer are being offered treatment-focused genetic testing (TFGT). As the demand for TFGT increases, streamlined methods of genetic education are needed.

METHODS

In this noninferiority trial, women aged <50 years with either a strong family history (FH+) or other features suggestive of a germ-line mutation (FH-) were randomized before definitive breast cancer surgery to receive TFGT education either as brief written materials (intervention group (IG)) or during a genetic counseling session at a familial cancer clinic (usual-care group (UCG)). Women completed self-report questionnaires at four time points over 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 135 women were included in the analysis, all of whom opted for TFGT. Decisional conflict about TFGT choice (primary outcome) was not inferior in the IG compared with the UCG (noninferiority margin of -10; mean difference = 2.45; 95% confidence interval -2.87-7.76; P = 0.36). Costs per woman counseled in the IG were significantly lower (AUD$89) compared with the UCG (AUD$173; t(115) = 6.02; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A streamlined model of educating women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about TFGT seems to be a cost-effective way of delivering education while ensuring that women feel informed and supported in their decision making, thus freeing resources for other women to access TFGT.Genet Med 19 4, 448-456.

Changing patterns of referrals and outcomes of genetic participation in gynaecological-oncology multidisciplinary care

BACKGROUND

Genetic participation in gynaecological oncology multidisciplinary team meetings (MDT) may identify the sentinel cancer in women with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer syndrome or Lynch syndrome.

AIMS

To identify the changing patterns of genetic referral from 2010 to 2014 and the outcomes of referrals through clinical MDT case review.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of cases of gynaecological cancer presented at the MDT meetings and genetics databases were reviewed to determine the frequency and outcomes of recommendations for genetic referral between 2010 and 2014.

RESULTS

Four hundred and sixty-two women of 2523 cases reviewed were recommended for referral, increasing from 8% in 2010 to 25% in 2014. However, 167 of 462 patients (36%) had not registered with a Hereditary Cancer Clinic in NSW/ACT, including 11 women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer and seven women with abnormal MMR immunohistochemistry. Mutations were identified in 40 of 165 women (24%) undergoing breast cancer BRCA1/2 testing and in ten of 25 women (40%) who underwent MMR genetic testing. Eighty-one first- or second-degree relatives of these women have undergone predictive testing, identifying 48 mutation carriers and 33 non-carriers.

CONCLUSION

Changing indications and increased participation by a genetic consultant in the weekly MDT meeting has led to increasing genetic referrals over the last five years. Follow up of referrals needs to be addressed. With decreasing costs of genetic testing and use of readily transportable DNA collected through saliva or mouth swabs, we propose that distance should not be a barrier to this model being extended to all centres providing care to gynaecological cancer patients.

Identifying Needs: a Qualitative Study of women's Experiences Regarding Rapid Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in the DNA BONus Study

Genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer is increasingly being offered in newly diagnosed breast and ovarian cancer patients. This genetic information may influence treatment decisions. However, there are some concerns that genetic testing offered in an already vulnerable situation might be an extra burden to these women. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of women who had been offered and accepted genetic testing when newly diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer. Four semi-structured focus-group interviews were conducted with 17 women recruited from a Norwegian multicenter study. The material was condensed, and conventional qualitative analysis was used to identify patterns in the participants’ descriptions. Three core themes were identified: 1) being “beside oneself” 2) altruism and ethical dilemmas 3) the need for support and counselling to assist the decision process. The present study indicates that women who are offered genetic testing when newly diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer want a consultation with a health professional. Personalized support and counselling might empower women to improve their ability to manage and comprehend this overwhelming situation, and find meaning in this experience.

Health professionals' evaluation of delivering treatment-focused genetic testing to women newly diagnosed with breast cancer

Increasingly, women are offered genetic testing shortly after diagnosis of breast cancer to facilitate decision-making about treatment, often referred to as 'treatment-focused genetic testing' (TFGT). As understanding the attitudes of health professionals is likely to inform its integration into clinical care we surveyed professionals who participated in our TFGT randomized control study. Thirty-six completed surveys were received (response rate 59%), 15 (42%) health professionals classified as genetic and 21 (58%) as non-genetic. Mainly positive experiences with participating in the TFGT trial were reported. The high cost of testing and who could best deliver information about TGFT to the patient were raised as key constraints to implementation of TFGT in usual care. More non-genetic than genetic health professionals (44 vs 8%) preferred that the surgeon provide the information for decision-making about TFGT. While costs of TFGT itself and the time and effort of staff involved were perceived barriers, as testing costs become lower, it is expected that TFGT will become a routine part of standard clinical care for patients at high genetic risk in the near future.

Genetic testing and familial implications in breast-ovarian cancer families

DNA-testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 has become incorporated in the diagnostic procedure of patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer. Since 1994 an immense amount of information has been gathered on mutation spectra, mutation risk assessment, cancer risks for mutation carriers, factors that modify these risks, unclassified DNA variants, surveillance strategies and preventive options. For the patient and family the main determinator still is whether a mutation is found or not. When a pathogenic mutation is detected in an index case, relatives can opt for pre-symptomatic DNA testing. However in the vast majority no mutation, or only unclear mutations are detectable yet. This means that a hereditary cause cannot be excluded, but pre-symptomatic DNA-testing is still unavailable for relatives. Surveillance for both index cases and relatives is based of the family history of cancer. Next generation genetic testing may help to elucidate genetic causes in these families.

Oncology health professionals' attitudes toward treatment-focused genetic testing for women newly diagnosed with breast cancer

AIM

This study explored the attitudes of oncology health professionals towards treatment-focused genetic testing (TFGT) for women newly diagnosed with breast cancer.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Members of several relevant medical organizations in Australia and New Zealand were invited via email to participate in an online survey.

RESULTS

A total of 149 respondents, including 40 surgeons, 46 oncologists and 63 breast care nurses, completed the online questionnaire. The majority of respondents believed that TFGT was useful for patient care (87.3%) and valuable for the treatment and management of breast cancer (90.6%). In multivariable analyses, breast care nurses were significantly more likely to agree that TFGT was useful for patient care and the treatment and management of breast cancer compared with oncologists and surgeons (β = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.01-0.60; p = 0.045). Participants also agreed that TFGT has an impact on treatment decision-making (96.0%), uptake of bilateral mastectomy (98.7%) and uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (98.0%) in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. A slight preference towards surgeons (49.7%) as the best health professional to make the initial offer of TFGT was observed and the majority of respondents suggested the best time to offer TFGT was shortly after diagnosis, when the treatment plan is discussed.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest health professionals have positive attitudes towards TFGT. Future training programs focusing on teamwork models and guidelines specifying health professionals' roles in regards to TFGT and follow-up management may be of benefit.

Issues of concern in risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing of younger breast cancer patients in Japan

About 5-10 % of breast cancer cases are considered to be hereditary, and germ line mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have been proven to contribute to the development of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC). Breast cancer diagnosed at a young age is an indication of a higher likelihood of HBOC. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing, especially for younger women with breast cancer, have started to be an integral element of practice due to advances in gene sequencing technologies and accumulating evidence for the clinical implications of BRCA mutation status for not only early breast cancer management, but also for the patient's own and their family's next cancer risk, and proactive steps toward a risk-reducing approach. As yet, the cancer genetic service system is immature in Japan. There are several problems to be solved to improve cancer genetic services in clinical practice for breast cancer.

Intrafamilial disclosure of risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: points to consider

The primary goal of breast and ovarian cancer screening is to minimize the cases of advanced disease and therefore its mortality rate. For hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, one method to reach this goal is to disseminate genetic risk information among family members. However, experience tells us that this information does not always reach family members in a timely manner, if at all. There are many moving parts to a decision to disclose genetic risk information within a family, and the lack of detail and cohesion in current guidelines do a disservice to hereditary breast cancer prevention. Utilizing legal, medical, and policy databases for literature, case law and policy documents relating to communication of genetic test results within families, as well as a consultative process with representative stakeholders, a points to consider has been developed to address a number of issues that might impact the ability and willingness of patients to inform family members of genetic risk. These include: what is "genetic information"; who is the "family"; why should patients inform their family members; and how should health professionals be involved in this process? This represents only an initial step towards fostering better communication within families. Additional research is needed to determine the best methods for encouraging this communication and motivations for disclosing or not and to promote the development of a solution, considering the complexity of human relationships and the probabilistic nature of genetic information.

The 'value' of values clarification in cancer-related decision aids

OBJECTIVE

A key component of decision aids (DAs) are the Value Clarification Exercises (VCEs), however, rates of completion VCEs are variable. The aim of this paper is to propose explanations for these variations.

METHODS

A review of the rates of completion and the reasons provided across eleven studies evaluating five different DAs was conducted.

RESULTS

Retrospective evaluation does not appear to be an indication of prospective use. Differences in mode of administration are unclear. Gender does not appear to have a difference on completion rates. Complexity of the decision appears to reflect rates of VCE completion. The main reason provided for non-completion of VCEs was that patients had already made a decision.

CONCLUSION

VCEs have shown a trend to producing better congruence between values and choices, but it remains unclear how VCEs impact on the quality of the decision. Value of VCEs in treatment decision-making has not been previously established and our data indicate information alone might be enough to clarify concepts.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

DAs are becoming more widely used in practice. It is important to understand the elements in a treatment decision-making so that the burden on the patient is at a minimum in practice.

How should we discuss genetic testing with women newly diagnosed with breast cancer? Design and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of two models of delivering education about treatment-focused genetic testing to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation testing offered shortly after a breast cancer diagnosis to inform women's treatment choices - treatment-focused genetic testing 'TFGT' - has entered clinical practice in specialist centers and is likely to be soon commonplace in acute breast cancer management, especially for younger women. Yet the optimal way to deliver information about TFGT to younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer is not known, particularly for those who were not suspected of having a hereditary breast cancer syndrome prior to their cancer diagnosis. Also, little is known about the behavioral and psychosocial impact or cost effectiveness of educating patients about TFGT. This trial aims to examine the impact and efficiency of two models of educating younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about genetic testing in order to provide evidence for a safe and effective future clinical pathway for this service.

DESIGN/METHODS

In this non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, 140 women newly diagnosed with breast cancer (aged less than 50 years) are being recruited from nine cancer centers in Australia. Eligible women with either a significant family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer or with other high risk features suggestive of a mutation detection rate of > 10% are invited by their surgeon prior to mastectomy or radiotherapy. After completing the first questionnaire, participants are randomized to receive either: (a) an educational pamphlet about genetic testing (intervention) or (b) a genetic counseling appointment at a family cancer center (standard care). Each participant is offered genetic testing for germline BRCA mutations. Decision-related and psychosocial outcomes are assessed over 12 months and include decisional conflict (primary outcome);uptake of bilateral mastectomy and/or risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy; cancer-specific- and general distress; family involvement in decision making; and decision regret. A process-oriented retrospective online survey will examine health professionals' attitudes toward TFGT; a health economic analysis will determine the cost effectiveness of the intervention.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide crucial information about the impact, efficiency and cost effectiveness of an educational pamphlet designed to inform younger women newly diagnosed with breast cancer about genetic testing. Issues regarding implementation of the trial are discussed.

Are we being overly cautious? A qualitative inquiry into the experiences and perceptions of treatment-focused germline BRCA genetic testing amongst women recently diagnosed with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Women with breast cancer, who are found to be BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, have a high risk of ovarian cancer and metachronous breast cancer. Treatment-focused genetic testing (TFGT), offered around the time of diagnosis, allows genetic test results to inform surgical treatment decisions. However, concern has been raised that offering TFGT at this time may overly increase psychological burden. This study aimed to qualitatively explore women's attitudes and experiences of TFGT.

METHODS

Women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer at age 50 years or less undertook a semi-structured telephone interview (n = 26). The sample included women who had been offered TFGT, based on family history and/or other risk criteria (n = 14), and women who had been diagnosed within the past 6-12 months and had not been offered TFGT (n = 12). Interviews explored women's attitudes towards TFGT, perceived benefits and disadvantages, implications of TFGT and impact on surgical decision making. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Women expressed positive attitudes towards TFGT and felt it was highly relevant to their surgical decision making. They did not feel that an offer of TFGT shortly after, or at the time of diagnosis, added undue psychological burden. The majority of women interviewed felt that TFGT should be incorporated into standard clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

TFGT is viewed favourably by women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to examine the long-term impact of TFGT. We conclude that an offer of TFGT is not perceived as 'too much, too soon' by relevant patients.