Oncologists' Use of Genomic Sequencing Data to Inform Clinical Management

Advancing maturity modeling for precision oncology

Introduction

This study aimed to map the maturity of precision oncology as an example of a Learning Health System by understanding the current state of practice, tools and informatics, and barriers and facilitators of maturity.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 34 professionals (e.g., clinicians, pathologists, and program managers) involved in Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs). Interviewees were recruited through outreach at 3 large academic medical centers (AMCs) (n = 16) and a Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) company (n = 18). Interviewees were asked about their roles and relationships with MTBs, processes and tools used, and institutional practices. The interviews were then coded and analyzed to understand the variation in maturity across the evolving field of precision oncology.

Results

The findings provide insight into the present level of maturity in the precision oncology field, including the state of tooling and informatics within the same domain, the effects of the critical environment on overall maturity, and prospective approaches to enhance maturity of the field. We found that maturity is relatively low, but continuing to evolve, across these dimensions due to the resource-intensive and complex sociotechnical infrastructure required to advance maturity of the field and to fully close learning loops.

Conclusion

Our findings advance the field by defining and contextualizing the current state of maturity and potential future strategies for advancing precision oncology, providing a framework to examine how learning health systems mature, and furthering the development of maturity models with new evidence.

Reflex BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumour genetic testing for high-grade serous ovarian cancer: streamlined for clinicians but what do patients think?

BACKGROUND

Reflex (automatic) BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genetic testing of tumour tissue is being completed for all newly diagnosed high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) in the province of Ontario, Canada. The objective of this study was to measure the psychological impact of tumour genetic testing among individuals with a new diagnosis of HGSOC.

METHODS

Participants had a new diagnosis of HGSOC and received reflex BRCA1/2 tumour genetic testing as a component of their care. Eligible individuals were recruited from two oncology centres in Toronto, Canada. One week after disclosure of tumour genetic test results, consenting participants were asked to complete a questionnaire that measured cancer-related distress, dispositional optimism, knowledge of hereditary breast/ovarian cancer, recall of tumour genetic test results, satisfaction, and the psychological impact of receiving tumour genetic test results. The Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire was used to measure the psychological impact of tumour genetic testing.

RESULTS

76 individuals completed the study survey; 13 said they did not receive their tumour test results. Of the remaining 63 participants, the average MICRA score was 26.8 (SD = 16.3). Higher total MICRA scores were seen among those with children (p = 0.02), who received treatment with primary surgery (p = 0.02), and had higher reported cancer-related distress (p < 0.001). Higher dispositional optimism (p < 0.001) and increasing age (p = 0.03) were associated with lower total MICRA scores. Most (83.5%) participants reported being satisfied/highly satisfied with having tumour testing completed; however, 40.8% could not accurately recall their tumor test results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to assess psychological outcomes following reflex BRCA1/2 tumour genetic testing in women newly diagnosed with HGSOC. Increased dispositional optimism provided a protective effect, while increased cancer-related distress increased the psychological impact of tumour genetic testing. Educational resources are needed to help increase patient understanding and recall of tumour results, particularly when tumour genetic testing includes analysis of genes that may have implications for hereditary cancer risk. Additional research is required to better understand the patient experience of reflex tumour genetic testing.

Patients' and Oncologists' Knowledge and Expectations Regarding Tumor Multigene Next-Generation Sequencing: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Tumor multigene next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly being offered to cancer patients to guide clinical management and determine eligibility for clinical trials. We undertook a review of studies examining the knowledge and attitudes of patients and oncologists regarding the primary results and potential secondary findings of such testing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search was conducted through the MEDLINE database using the following keywords: "neoplasms" and "molecular sequencing / genome sequencing / tumor profiling / NGS / whole exome sequencing" and "patient / oncologist" and "knowledge / attitudes / satisfaction / experience / evaluation / perspective / practice / preference." Articles meeting the inclusion criteria and additional relevant articles from their references were selected.

RESULTS

From 1,142 publications identified by the search and 9 from references, 21 publications were included in the final review. Patients generally had positive attitudes toward tumor NGS despite relatively little knowledge of test-related genetics concepts, but their expectations often exceeded the reality of low clinical utility. Patients with higher education and greater genetics knowledge had more realistic expectations and a more altruistic view of the role of NGS. Attitudes toward disclosure of secondary findings were highly variable. Oncologists had poor to moderate genomic literacy; they communicated challenges with tempering patient expectations and deciding what information to disclose.

CONCLUSION

Patients considering undergoing tumor NGS should be provided with easily understandable resources explaining the procedure, goals, and probable outcomes, whenever possible based on evidence-based guidelines. Continuing medical education programs on this topic for oncology health care professionals should strive to improve their genomic literacy and instruct them on how to optimally present this information to their patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Oncologists are increasingly offering tumor multigene testing to patients with advanced cancers to guide more "personalized" treatment and/or determine eligibility for clinical trials. However, patients often have inadequate understanding and unrealistic expectations. Oncologists must ensure that they themselves have sufficient knowledge of the benefits and limitations of testing and must provide their patients with appropriate educational resources. Prior to testing, patients should be told the likelihood of finding a mutation in their specific tumor type for which a targeted treatment or clinical trial is available. Patients also need clear information about the possibility and implications of secondary findings.

How Can Law and Policy Advance Quality in Genomic Analysis and Interpretation for Clinical Care?

Delivering high quality genomics-informed care to patients requires accurate test results whose clinical implications are understood. While other actors, including state agencies, professional organizations, and clinicians, are involved, this article focuses on the extent to which the federal agencies that play the most prominent roles - the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services enforcing CLIA and the FDA - effectively ensure that these elements are met and concludes by suggesting possible ways to improve their oversight of genomic testing.

Integration of Germline Pharmacogenetics Into a Tumor Sequencing Program

PURPOSE

Evidence-based guidelines inform treatment decisions for patients for whom germline genetic information is available. Our real-time tumor sequencing program, which makes precision treatment decisions for patients with cancer, produces matched germline information, providing a unique opportunity to efficiently implement pharmacogenetics and benefit patients.

METHODS

The germline genetic database from the Michigan Oncology Sequencing (MI-Oncoseq) program was searched for 21 clinically actionable polymorphisms in five cancer-relevant genes: TPMT, DPYD, CYP2C19, CYP3A5, and UGT1A1. Residual germ line DNA was sent to an external Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-approved laboratory for confirmatory genotyping. The medical records of MI-Oncoseq patients with actionable phenotypes were searched for receipt of relevant drugs and to determine whether having genetic information at the time of treatment would have led to a treatment recommendation.

RESULTS

All nine variants in TPMT, DPYD, and CYP2C19 that were detected in MI-Oncoseq were confirmed by external genotyping. Genotype determinations could not be made for CYP3A5*3, UGT1A1*28, or UGT1A1*80. On the basis of retrospective assessment of 115 adult and pediatric patient records, 4.3% (n = 5) had a potentially clinically actionable phenotype for TPMT, DPYD, or CYP2C19 and received a relevant medication. After accounting for differences in adult and pediatric recommendations, three of these patients could have received a treatment recommendation at the time of prescribing.

CONCLUSION

Germline genotype determinations for TPMT, DPYD, and CYP2C19 can be used to make evidence-based treatment recommendations in MI-Oncoseq patients. Although the proportion of patients for whom recommendations can be made is small, this added value to MI-Oncoseq and patient care comes at no additional genotyping cost. Pharmacogenetic assessment should be integrated into tumor sequencing programs that genotype matched germline DNA; however, the complexity and additional cost of implementing pharmacogenetics remain challenging.