Delivery Of Cascade Screening For Hereditary Conditions: A Scoping Review Of The Literature

Cascade testing for hereditary cancer in Singapore: how population genomics help guide clinical policy

Hereditary Cancer makes up around 5-10% of all cancers. It is important to diagnose hereditary cancer in a timely fashion, as not only do patients require long-term care from a young age, but their relatives also require management. The main approach to capture at-risk relatives is cascade testing. It involves genetic testing of relatives of the first detected carrier of a pathogenic variant in a family i.e. the proband. The current standard of care for cascade testing is a patient-mediated approach. Probands are then advised to inform and encourage family members to undergo genetic testing. In Singapore, cascade testing is inefficient, around 10-15%, lower than the 30% global average. Here, we describe the cascade testing process and its effort to increase testing in Singapore. Precision Health Research, Singapore (PRECISE), was set up to coordinate Singapore's National Precision Medicine strategy and has awarded five clinical implementation pilots, with one of them seeking to identify strategies for how cascade testing for hereditary cancer can be increased in a safe and cost-efficient manner. Achieving this will be done through addressing barriers such as cost, manpower shortages, exploring a digital channel for contacting at-risk relatives, and getting a deeper insight into why genetic testing gets declined. If successful, it will likely result in care pathways that are a cost-effective public health intervention for identifying individuals at risk. Surveillance and management of those unaffected at-risk individuals, if caught early, will result in improved patient outcomes, and further reduce the healthcare burden for the economy.

Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs

Germline genetic sequencing is now at the forefront of cancer treatment and preventative medicine. Cascade genetic testing, or the testing of at-risk relatives, is extremely promising as it offers genetic testing and potentially life-saving risk-reduction strategies to a population exponentially enriched for the risk of carrying a cancer-associated pathogenic variant. However, many relatives do not complete cascade testing due to barriers that span individual, relationship, healthcare community, and societal/policy domains. We have reviewed the published research on cascade testing. Our aim is to evaluate barriers to cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes and explore strategies to mitigate these barriers, with the goal of promoting increased uptake of cascade genetic testing.

Challenges and opportunities for Lynch syndrome cascade testing in the United States

Lynch syndrome is an underdiagnosed genetic condition that increases lifetime colorectal, endometrial, and other cancer risk. Cascade testing in relatives is recommended to increase diagnoses and enable access to cancer prevention services, yet uptake is limited due to documented multi-level barriers. Individual barriers such as feelings of fear, guilt, and anxiety and limited knowledge about Lynch syndrome as well as interpersonal barriers including complex family dynamics and language barriers limit family communication about Lynch syndrome and prevent uptake of genetic screening for relatives. Organizational and environmental barriers including a shortage of genetics professionals, high costs, and fears of discrimination also reduce cascade testing. These multi-level barriers may disproportionately impact underserved populations in the United States, such as individuals with lower incomes, limited English-speaking proficiency, lower educational attainment, and inadequate access to health systems. Multi-level facilitators of cascade testing include interpersonal support from family members, peers, and healthcare providers, educational resources, and motivation to improve family health. Taken together, these barriers and facilitators demonstrate a need for interventions and strategies that address multi-level factors to increase cascade testing in families with Lynch syndrome and other hereditary cancer conditions. We provide an example of a cascade testing intervention that has been developed for use in individuals diagnosed with Lynch syndrome and discuss the variety of current approaches to addressing these multi-level barriers.

A registry-based study on universal screening for defective mismatch repair in colorectal cancer in Denmark highlights disparities in screening uptake and counselling referrals

Universal screening for defective mismatch repair (dMMR) in colorectal cancer utilizes immunohistochemical staining for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PSM2. Additionally, BRAF V600E mutations status and MLH1 hypermethylation should be performed to distinguish germline and somatic dMMR alterations. A decade of Danish population-based registries has been analysed regarding screening uptake, detection rate and referral to genetic counselling. MMR testing was performed in 71·8% (N = 34,664) of newly diagnosed colorectal cancers with an increasing trend to 88·8% coverage in the study's final year. The likelihood of undergoing MMR testing was reduced in males with 2% (95% CI 0·4-2·7, p = 0·008), with 4·1% in patients above age 70 years (95% CI 1·5-6·6, p = 0·003) compared in patients below age 51 years, with 16·3% in rectal cancers (95% CI 15·1-17·6, p < 0·001) and 1·4% left-sided colon cancers (95% CI 0·1-1·7, p = 0·03) compared to right-sided colon cancers. Tumour stage II and III increased the likelihood of being tested, with 3·7% for stage II (95% CI 2·2-5·6, p < 0·001) and 3·3% for stage III tumours (95% CI 1·8-4·8, p < 0·001) compared to stage I tumours, whereas the likelihood for stage IV tumours is reduced by 35·7% (95% CI 34·2-37·2, p < 0·001). Test rates significantly differed between the Danish health care regions. dMMR was identified in 15·1% (95% CI 14·8-15·6, p < 0·001) cases with somatic MMR inactivation in 6·7% of the cases. 8·3% tumours showed hereditary dMMR expression patterns, and 20·0% of those were referred to genetic counselling. Despite the high uptake rates, we found disparities between patient groups and missed opportunities for genetic diagnostics.

Familial communication and cascade testing following elective genomic testing

Familial communication of results and cascade genetic testing (CGT) can extend the benefits of genetic screening beyond the patient to their at-risk relatives. While an increasing number of health systems are offering genetic screening as an elective clinical service, data are limited about how often results are shared and how often results lead to CGT. From 2018 to 2022, the Sanford Health system offered the Sanford Chip, an elective genomic test that included screening for medically actionable predispositions for disease recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics for secondary findings disclosure, to its adult primary care patients. We analyzed patient-reported data about familial sharing of results and CGT among patients who received Sanford Chip results at least 1 year previously. Among the patients identified with medically actionable predispositions, 94.6% (53/56) reported disclosing their result to at least one family member, compared with 46.7% (423/906) of patients with uninformative findings (p < 0.001). Of the patients with actionable predispositions, 52.2% (12/23) with a monogenic disease risk and 12.1% (4/33) with a carrier status reported that their relatives underwent CGT. Results suggest that while the identification of monogenic risk during elective genomic testing motivates CGT in many at-risk relatives, there remain untested at-risk relatives who may benefit from future CGT. Findings identify an area that may benefit from increased genetic counseling and the development of tools and resources to encourage CGT for family members.

Genetic Screening-Emerging Issues

In many countries, some form of genetic screening is offered to all or part of the population, either in the form of well-organized screening programs or in a less formalized way. Screening can be offered at different phases of life, such as preconception, prenatal, neonatal and later in life. Screening should only be offered if the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Technical innovations in testing and treatment are driving changes in the field of prenatal and neonatal screening, where many jurisdictions have organized population-based screening programs. As a result, a greater number and wider range of conditions are being added to the programs, which can benefit couples' reproductive autonomy (preconception and prenatal screening) and improve early diagnosis to prevent irreversible health damage in children (neonatal screening) and in adults (cancer and cascade screening). While many developments in screening are technology-driven, citizens may also express a demand for innovation in screening, as was the case with non-invasive prenatal testing. Relatively new emerging issues for genetic screening, especially if testing is performed using DNA sequencing, relate to organization, data storage and interpretation, benefit-harm ratio and distributive justice, information provision and follow-up, all connected to acceptability in current healthcare systems.

Family cascade screening for equitable identification of familial hypercholesterolemia: study protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a heritable disorder affecting 1.3 million individuals in the USA. Eighty percent of people with FH are undiagnosed, particularly minoritized populations including Black or African American people, Asian or Asian American people, and women across racial groups. Family cascade screening is an evidence-based practice that can increase diagnosis and improve health outcomes but is rarely implemented in routine practice, representing an important care gap. In pilot work, we leveraged best practices from behavioral economics and implementation science-including mixed-methods contextual inquiry with clinicians, patients, and health system constituents-to co-design two patient-facing implementation strategies to address this care gap: (a) an automated health system-mediated strategy and (b) a nonprofit foundation-mediated strategy with contact from a foundation-employed care navigator. This trial will test the comparative effectiveness of these strategies on completion of cascade screening for relatives of individuals with FH, centering equitable reach.

METHODS

We will conduct a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type III randomized controlled trial testing the comparative effectiveness of two strategies for implementing cascade screening with 220 individuals with FH (i.e., probands) per arm identified from a large northeastern health system. The primary implementation outcome is reach, or the proportion of probands with at least one first-degree biological relative (parent, sibling, child) in the USA who is screened for FH through the study. Our secondary implementation outcomes include the number of relatives screened and the number of relatives meeting the American Heart Association criteria for FH. Our secondary clinical effectiveness outcome is post-trial proband cholesterol level. We will also use mixed methods to identify implementation strategy mechanisms for implementation strategy effectiveness while centering equity.

DISCUSSION

We will test two patient-facing implementation strategies harnessing insights from behavioral economics that were developed collaboratively with constituents. This trial will improve our understanding of how to implement evidence-based cascade screening for FH, which implementation strategies work, for whom, and why. Learnings from this trial can be used to equitably scale cascade screening programs for FH nationally and inform cascade screening implementation efforts for other genetic disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05750667. Registered 15 February 2023-retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05750667 .

Family health beliefs and cascade genetic testing in Asian families with hereditary cancer risk: "Okay, now what?"

The limited literature on Asian family communication of hereditary cancer risk and cascade genetic testing for pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 has reported that Asian patients have selective communication of test results and lower cascade testing rates. To better understand the factors that impact communication and cascade testing in Asian families, we conducted an in-depth qualitative study guided by the Health Belief Model. Participants with heterozygous PVs in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, or PALB2, who identified their family's origins to an Asian country, were recruited from the Stanford Cancer Genetics Research Database in October-November 2021. Utilizing a constructivist approach, we conducted sixteen semi-structured interviews around family communication and cascade genetic testing. The research team analyzed the transcript data using a reflexive thematic approach. Extensive discussions between the research team resulted in three primary themes presented in this paper: (1) the role of family health beliefs in cascade genetic testing, (2) changes in communication as a result of genetic testing, and (3) genetics providers' role in supporting family discussions on cascade genetic testing. Certain health beliefs, such as perceived susceptibility to cancer and self-efficacy to take action, were co-created by family members and these shared beliefs influenced decisions about genetic testing, family communication, and family support during the cascade genetic testing process. Participants shared strategies for how genetics providers can prepare Asian patients for more effective conversations with relatives and better address potential testing barriers by tailoring information and providing anticipatory guidance. This study represents an important contribution to the literature about cascade testing among an underrepresented group. Shared family health beliefs about genetic testing may be particularly relevant for this community and these findings can inform strategies to increase cascade genetic testing in Asian families.

Cost-Effectiveness of Population-Based Multigene Testing for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prevention

Importance

The current method of BRCA testing for breast and ovarian cancer prevention, which is based on family history, often fails to identify many carriers of pathogenic variants. Population-based genetic testing offers a transformative approach in cancer prevention by allowing for proactive identification of any high-risk individuals and enabling early interventions.

Objective

To assess the lifetime incremental effectiveness, costs, and cost-effectiveness of population-based multigene testing vs family history-based testing.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation used a microsimulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of multigene testing (BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2) for all women aged 30 to 35 years compared with the current standard of care that is family history based. Carriers of pathogenic variants were offered interventions, such as magnetic resonance imaging with or without mammography, chemoprevention, or risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, to reduce cancer risk. A total of 2000 simulations were run on 1 000 000 women, using a lifetime time horizon and payer perspective, and costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. This study was conducted from September 1, 2020, to December 15, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quantified as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Secondary outcomes included incremental cost, additional breast and ovarian cancer cases prevented, and excess deaths due to coronary heart disease (CHD).

Results

The study assessed 1 000 000 simulated women aged 30 to 35 years in the US. In the base case, population-based multigene testing was more cost-effective compared with family history-based testing, with an ICER of $55 548 per QALY (95% CI, $47 288-$65 850 per QALY). Population-based multigene testing would be able to prevent an additional 1338 cases of breast cancer and 663 cases of ovarian cancer, but it would also result in 69 cases of excess CHD and 10 excess CHD deaths per million women. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that the probability that population-based multigene testing is cost-effective was 100%. When the cost of the multigene test exceeded $825, population-based testing was no longer cost-effective (ICER, $100 005 per QALY; 95% CI, $87 601-$11 6323).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this economic analysis of population-based multigene testing, population-based testing was a more cost-effective strategy for the prevention of breast cancer and ovarian cancer when compared with the current family history-based testing strategy at the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These findings support the need for more comprehensive genetic testing strategies to identify pathogenic variant carriers and enable informed decision-making for personalized risk management.

Experiences of Family Communication and Cascade Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer in Medically Underserved Populations-A Qualitative Study

We sought to explore the intrafamilial communication and cascade genetic testing (CGT) experiences of patients with hereditary cancer from diverse, medically underserved populations and their relatives. Participants included patients receiving oncology care at an urban, safety net hospital in Texas or comprehensive cancer center in Alabama and their first-degree relatives. In-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were completed wherein patients shared their experiences with genetic counseling (GC), genetic testing (GT), and communicating their results to relatives. Relatives shared their experiences receiving information from the patient and considering CGT. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and themes were identified. Of 25 participating patients, most recalled key aspects of GC and their GT results. Most (80%) patients shared their results with relatives, but only some relatives underwent CGT; patients reported low perceived susceptibility to hereditary cancer as a common barrier to CGT for their relatives. Of 16 participating relatives, most reported feeling distress upon learning the patient's GT results. Relatives were fearful of learning their own CGT results but identified prevention and early detection as CGT benefits. Interviews identified opportunities during family communication to improve relatives' perceived susceptibility to hereditary cancer. Tailored resources may support patients and relatives experiencing distress and fear during GT.

PREVENTION RELEVANCE

This study of intrafamilial communication and cascade genetic testing experiences of patients with hereditary cancer and their relatives from diverse, medically underserved populations identified relatives' perceived susceptibility to hereditary cancer risks, distress, and fear as frequent reactions and barriers to testing. These results may inform future hereditary cancer prevention efforts.

Direct notification by health professionals of relatives at-risk of genetic conditions (with patient consent): views of the Australian public

Genetic risk information for medically actionable conditions has relevance for patients' blood relatives. However, cascade testing uptake in at-risk families is <50%, and the burden of contacting relatives is a significant barrier to dissemination of risk information. Health professionals (HPs) could notify at-risk relatives directly, with patients' consent. This practice is supported by international literature, including strong public support. However, there is little exploration of the Australian public's views about this issue. We surveyed Australian adults using a consumer research company. Respondents were provided a hypothetical scenario and asked about views and preferences regarding direct contact by HPs. 1030 members of the public responded, with median age 45 y and 51% female. The majority would want to be told about genetic risk for conditions that can be prevented/treated early (85%) and contacted directly by a HP (68%). Most preferred a letter that included specific information about the genetic condition in the family (67%) and had no privacy concerns about HPs sending a letter using contact details provided by a relative (85%). A minority (< 5%) had significant privacy concerns, mostly about use of personal contact information. Concerns included ensuring information was not shared with third parties. Almost 50% would prefer that a family member contacted them before the letter was sent, while about half did not prefer this or were unsure. The Australian public supports (and prefers) direct notification of relatives at risk of medically actionable genetic conditions. Guidelines would assist with clarifying clinicians' discretion in this area.

Applying the framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions to increase family communication about hereditary cancer

Objective

Evaluate an intervention to increase family communication (FC) of positive hereditary cancer test results using the Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions (FDECI).

Methods

We developed 'programme theory' during the FDECI development phase by aligning intervention components with behavior change techniques (BCTs) and theoretical factors expected to improve FC. During the feasibility phase, we obtained feedback from 12 stakeholder interviews.

Results

Intervention components aligned with a total of 14 unique BCTs for which prior evidence links the BCT to theoretical factors that influence behavior change. Constructive stakeholder feedback included: more information desired, rewording to support autonomy by highlighting options, and improvements to navigation, visuals, and audio. Positive comments included: comprehensiveness of materials, modeling of conversations, and usefulness of the materials for helping a person prepare to share positive test results.

Conclusion

The first FDECI phases were helpful for improving the intervention and planning our ongoing effectiveness and future implementation phases.

Innovation

Our application of the FDECI is novel, including plans to test our 'programme theory' using coincidence analysis (CNA) to determine who accesses which intervention materials, how utilizing certain materials impact the aligned theoretical factors, and whether these in turn make a difference in the behavioral outcome.

Development of a novel measure of advanced cancer patients' perceived utility of secondary germline findings from tumor genomic profiling

Objective

Tumor genomic profiling (TGP) can inform advanced cancer patients' treatment decisions, and also reveal secondary germline findings-information about inherited risks for cancer and other disorders. We sought to develop a measure of patient perceptions of the clinical and personal utility of secondary germline findings.

Methods

We developed a draft survey based on literature and patient interview data (n=40). We evaluated and refined the survey through cognitive interviews with advanced cancer patients who received secondary germline findings from TGP (n=10). The survey was psychometrically validated with data from two independent samples of advanced cancer patients undergoing TGP (total n=349).

Results

Cognitive interviews offered opportunities for survey refinement and confirmation of its comprehensible nature. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the survey identified 16 items across three subscales with strong internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.79): perceived utility for others, perceived utility for self and health, and confidence in secondary findings.

Conclusion

We developed a novel valid scale with promise for measuring advanced cancer patients' perceptions of the utility of secondary germline findings.

Innovation

We offer a new patient-derived measure of perceived utility of and confidence in secondary germline findings with potential applications for precision oncology research and clinical communication.

Most people share genetic test results with relatives even if the findings are normal: Family communication in a diverse population

PURPOSE

With increasing utilization of genetic testing, sharing genetic information can become part of general family health communication while providing biological relatives with important information about their own genetic risk. Importantly, little is known about motivations for and barriers to family communication of genetic information in historically underserved populations.

METHODS

Using mixed methods, we explored patient experiences with family communication in a study population of English- and Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 to 49 years, enriched for participants from historically underserved backgrounds. Risk screening for hereditary cancer guided genetic testing for cancer risk genes and other medically actionable findings.

RESULTS

Most participants overall (91%), including most with normal findings (89%), shared or planned to share their results with relatives. Common motivations for sharing results were to give relatives information about their genetic risk and because the participant thought the results were interesting. Reasons for not sharing were limited contact with relatives, perceptions of limited clinical utility for relatives, and concern that discussion of genetic information was stigmatized or taboo.

CONCLUSION

Results demonstrate high rates of sharing genetic information, indicate motivations for sharing go beyond facilitating genetic testing for relatives, and suggest general willingness to share genetic information as part of family health communication.

Prevalence and genetic spectrum associated with hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes, the need to improve cancer risk awareness, and family cascade testing in Vietnam

In Vietnam, colorectal cancer is one of the top diagnosed cancers, with 5-10% originating from inherited mutations. This study aims to define the mutation spectrum associated with hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes (HCCS) in Vietnam, evaluate the influence of genetic testing on carriers' awareness, and also investigate the barriers in familial testing. Genetic test reports were collected to identify HCCS cases, then cases underwent a survey investigating self-risk and familial-risk awareness, proactive cancer screening, and familial testing barriers. Participant characteristics, mutation prevalence, and results from the survey were descriptively analyzed and reported. Of all genetic test results, 3% (49/1632) were identified with mutations related to HCCS. Over 77% of them belonged to Lynch syndrome. PMS2 appeared to be the gene with the highest mutation frequency, while MLH1 was the lowest. 44% of cases further undertook cancer screening tests, and 48% of cases' families had uptake genetic testing. The biggest barrier of familial members for not taking genetic test was psychological reasons (fear, not being interested, or not feeling necessary). This study provided new evidence for HCCS mutation spectrum in Vietnamese population and the success in promoting cascade test in high-risk family members through financial and technical support. Also, study has suggested the needs of an innovative genetic testing process focusing on the quality of pre-and post-test consultancy, an increase in follow-ups, and the change in policy for permission of contacting relatives directly to improve the rate of cascade testing and proactive cancer screening.

Incorporating Value-Based Decisions in Breast Cancer Treatment Algorithms

Given the excellent prognosis and availability of evidence-based treatment, patients with early-stage breast cancer are at risk of overtreatment. In this review, we summarize key opportunities to incorporate value-based decisions to optimize the delivery of high-value treatment across the breast cancer care continuum.

Your Family Connects: A Theory-Based Intervention to Encourage Communication about Possible Inherited Cancer Risk among Ovarian Cancer Survivors and Close Relatives

INTRODUCTION

Encouraging family communication about possible genetic risk has become among the most important avenues for achieving the full potential of genomic discovery for primary and secondary prevention. Yet, effective family-wide risk communication (i.e., conveying genetic risk status and its meaning for other family members) remains a critical gap in the field. We aim to describe the iterative process of developing a scalable population-based communication outreach intervention, Your Family Connects, to reach ovarian cancer survivors and close relatives to communicate the potential for inherited risk and to consider genetic counseling.

METHODS

Relational-level theories (e.g., interdependence theory) suggest that interventions to promote family cancer risk communication will be most effective if they consider the qualities of specific relationships and activate motives to preserve the relationship. Informed by these theories, we collaborated with 14 citizen scientists (survivors of ovarian cancer or relatives) and collected 261 surveys and 39 structured interviews over 12 weeks of citizen science activities in 2020.

RESULTS

The citizen science findings and consideration of relational-level theories informed the content and implementation of Your Family Connects (www.yourfamilyconnects.org). CS results showed survivors favor personal contact with close relatives, but relatives were open to alternative contact methods, such as through health professionals. Recognizing the need for varied approaches based on relationship dynamics, we implemented a relative contact menu to enable survivors identify at-risk relatives and provide multiple contact options (i.e., survivor contact, health professional contact, and delayed contact). In line with relational autonomy principles, we included pros and cons for each option, assisting survivors in choosing suitable contact methods for each relative.

DISCUSSION

Our developed intervention represents a novel application of relational-level theories and partnership with citizen scientists to expand genetic services reach to increase the likelihood for fair distribution of cancer genomic advances. The Your Family Connects intervention as part of a randomized trial in collaboration with the Georgia Cancer Registry compared with standard outreach.

Privacy Implications of Contacting the At-Risk Relatives of Patients with Medically Actionable Genetic Predisposition, with Patient Consent: A Hypothetical Australian Case Study

Genetic risk information has relevance for patients' blood relatives. However, cascade testing uptake in at-risk families is <50%. International research supports direct notification of at-risk relatives by health professionals (HPs), with patient consent. However, HPs express concerns about the privacy implications of this practice. Our privacy analysis, grounded in a clinically relevant hypothetical scenario, considers the types of personal information involved in direct notification of at-risk relatives and the application of Australian privacy regulations. It finds that collecting relatives' contact details, and using those details (with patient consent) to notify relatives of possible genetic risk, does not breach Australian privacy law, providing that HPs adhere to regulatory requirements. It finds the purported "right to know" does not prevent disclosure of genetic information to at-risk relatives. Finally, the analysis confirms that the discretion available to HPs does not equate to a positive duty to warn at-risk relatives. Thus, direct notification of a patient's at-risk relatives regarding medically actionable genetic information, with patient consent, is not a breach of Australian privacy regulations, providing it is conducted in accordance with the applicable principles set out. Clinical services should consider offering this service to patients where appropriate. National guidelines would assist with the clarification of the discretion for HPs.

Privacy and utility of genetic testing in families with hereditary cancer syndromes living in three countries: the international cascade genetic screening experience

Background: Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and Lynch syndrome are associated with increased lifetime risk for common cancers. Offering cascade genetic testing to cancer-free relatives of individuals with HBOC or LS is a public health intervention for cancer prevention. Yet, little is known about the utility and value of information gained from cascade testing. This paper discusses ELSI encountered during the implementation of cascade testing in three countries with national healthcare systems: Switzerland, Korea, and Israel. Methods: A workshop presented at the 5th International ELSI Congress discussed implementation of cascade testing in the three countries based on exchange of data and experiences from the international CASCADE cohort. Results: Analyses focused on models of accessing genetic services (clinic-based versus population-based screening), and models of initiating cascade testing (patient-mediated dissemination versus provider-mediated dissemination of testing results to relatives). The legal framework of each country, organization of the healthcare system, and socio-cultural norms determined the utility and value of genetic information gained from cascade testing. Conclusion: The juxtaposition of individual versus public health interests generates significant ELSI controversies associated with cascade testing, which compromise access to genetic services and the utility and value of genetic information, despite national healthcare/universal coverage.

Cascade testing after exome sequencing: Retrospective analysis of linked family data at 2 US laboratories

PURPOSE

Cascade testing, the process of testing a proband's at-risk relatives, is integral to realizing the full value of genomic sequencing. However, there is little empirical evidence on the uptake of cascade testing after a positive exome sequencing (ES) result in a population of probands with diverse clinical indications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed administrative data from 2 US clinical laboratories that perform ES. For each proband with a positive ES result, we used linked family data to describe the frequency of relatives' cascade testing performed at the same laboratory, variant detection yield of cascade tests, and characteristics of probands and relatives categorized on the basis of cascade testing completion.

RESULTS

Among the 3723 positive ES results across both laboratories, 426 relatives of 282 probands completed cascade testing (uptake = 7.6%). An average of 1.5 relatives (SD = 0.9) were tested per proband. Of the 426 relatives tested, 200 had a variant of interest detected (variant detection yield = 47.0%).

CONCLUSION

In our real-world data analysis, a small proportion of probands with a positive ES result subsequently had relatives complete cascade testing at the same laboratory. However, approximately half of the tested relatives received a clinically significant result that could have implications for clinical management or reproductive planning. Additional research on ways to increase cascade testing uptake is warranted.

Population Genomic Screening for Three Common Hereditary Conditions : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of screening the U.S. population for Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 genomic conditions is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous genomic screening for Lynch syndrome (LS), hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH).

DESIGN

Decision analytic Markov model.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

Separate age-based cohorts (ages 20 to 60 years at time of screening) of racially and ethnically representative U.S. adults.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

U.S. health care payer.

INTERVENTION

Population genomic screening using clinical sequencing with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes, cascade testing of first-degree relatives, and recommended preventive interventions for identified probands.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incident breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer cases; incident cardiovascular events; quality-adjusted survival; and costs.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Screening 100 000 unselected 30-year-olds resulted in 101 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 77 to 127) fewer overall cancer cases and 15 (95% UI, 4 to 28) fewer cardiovascular events and an increase of 495 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (95% UI, 401 to 757) at an incremental cost of $33.9 million (95% UI, $27.0 million to $41.1 million). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $68 600 per QALY gained (95% UI, $41 800 to $88 900).

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-old cohorts was cost-effective in 99%, 88%, and 19% of probabilistic simulations, respectively, at a $100 000-per-QALY threshold. The test costs at which screening 30-, 40-, and 50-year-olds reached the $100 000-per-QALY threshold were $413, $290, and $166, respectively. Variant prevalence and adherence to preventive interventions were also highly influential parameters.

LIMITATIONS

Population averages for model inputs, which were derived predominantly from European populations, vary across ancestries and health care environments.

CONCLUSION

Population genomic screening with a restricted panel of high-evidence genes associated with 3 CDC Tier 1 conditions is likely to be cost-effective in U.S. adults younger than 40 years if the testing cost is relatively low and probands have access to preventive interventions.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Human Genome Research Institute.

Diagnostic yield of genetic screening in a diverse, community-ascertained cohort

BACKGROUND

Population screening for genetic risk of adult-onset preventable conditions has been proposed as an attractive public health intervention. Screening unselected individuals can identify many individuals who will not be identified through current genetic testing guidelines.

METHODS

We sought to evaluate enrollment in and diagnostic yield of population genetic screening in a resource-limited setting among a diverse population. We developed a low-cost, short-read next-generation sequencing panel of 25 genes that had 98.4% sensitivity and 99.98% specificity compared to diagnostic panels. We used email invitations to recruit a diverse cohort of patients in the University of Washington Medical Center system unselected for personal or family history of hereditary disease. Participants were sent a saliva collection kit in the mail with instructions on kit use and return. Results were returned using a secure online portal. Enrollment and diagnostic yield were assessed overall and across race and ethnicity groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 40,857 people were invited and 2889 (7.1%) enrolled. Enrollment varied across race and ethnicity groups, with the lowest enrollment among African American individuals (3.3%) and the highest among Multiracial or Other Race individuals (13.0%). Of 2864 enrollees who received screening results, 106 actionable variants were identified in 103 individuals (3.6%). Of those who screened positive, 30.1% already knew about their results from prior genetic testing. The diagnostic yield was 74 new, actionable genetic findings (2.6%). The addition of more recently identified cancer risk genes increased the diagnostic yield of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Population screening can identify additional individuals that could benefit from prevention, but challenges in recruitment and sample collection will reduce actual enrollment and yield. These challenges should not be overlooked in intervention planning or in cost and benefit analysis.

Optimizing communication strategies and designing a comprehensive program to facilitate cascade testing for familial hypercholesterolemia

BACKGROUND

This project aimed to optimize communication strategies to support family communication about familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and improve cascade testing uptake among at-risk relatives. Individuals and families with FH provided feedback on multiple strategies including: a family letter, digital tools, and direct contact.

METHODS

Feedback from participants was collected via dyadic interviews (n = 11) and surveys (n = 98) on communication strategies and their proposed implementation to improve cascade testing uptake. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify how to optimize each strategy. We categorized optimizations and their implementation within the project's healthcare system using a Traffic Light approach.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis resulted in four distinct suggested optimizations for each communication strategy and seven suggested optimizations that were suitable across all strategies. Four suggestions for developing a comprehensive cascade testing program, which would offer all optimized communication strategies also emerged. All optimized suggestions coded green (n = 21) were incorporated. Suggestions coded yellow (n = 12) were partially incorporated. Only two suggestions were coded red and could not be incorporated.

CONCLUSIONS

This project demonstrates how to collect and analyze stakeholder feedback for program design. We identified feasible suggested optimizations, resulting in communication strategies that are patient-informed and patient-centered. Optimized strategies were implemented in a comprehensive cascade testing program.

Development and early-stage evaluation of a patient portal to enhance familial communication about hereditary cancer susceptibility testing: A patient-driven approach

INTRODUCTION

Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCSs) can improve health outcomes through cancer risk mitigation strategies. Effective communication between tested individuals and their family members is key to reducing the hereditary cancer burden. Our objective was to develop a patient portal to improve familial communication for patients undergoing HCS genetic testing, followed by an early-phase evaluation.

METHODS

The portal was developed following the completion of 25 semistructured interviews with individuals having undergone HCS susceptibility testing at BC Cancer. Following initial development, we recruited patients and healthcare providers to provide critical feedback informing portal refinement. Quantitative feedback was summarized using descriptive statistics, and qualitative feedback was synthesized by two reviewers who engaged in iterative discussion within the research team to prioritize recommendations for integration.

RESULTS

The patient portal includes four key components consisting of (a) targeted educational information about hereditary cancer and HBOC syndrome associated risks and testing process overview, (b) a general frequently asked questions 'FAQ' page informed by the qualitative interviews, patient partner feedback, and consultation with the HCP, (c) guidance to support familial communication including a video developed with a patient partner describing their lived experience navigating the communication process and (d) a series of lay summaries of genetic test findings to support information transfer among family members. Thirteen healthcare providers and seven patients participated in user testing. Domains within which participant recommendations were provided included presentation, educational content and process clarification.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation demonstrates the value of continual integration of patient and provider preferences through the development of tools endeavouring to assist with complex genomics-informed decision-making. Our work aims to broaden the population-wide impact of HCS testing programs by improving communication processes between probands and their potentially affected family members.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This work involved a patient partner who was actively engaged in all aspects of the research investigation including protocol development, review and editing of all study documentation (including that of the previously published qualitative investigation), interpretation of results, as well as reviewing and editing the manuscript. Patient partners and healthcare professionals were recruited as research participants to provide critical feedback on the patient portal.

Are there differences in perceptions, preferences and attitudes towards disclosure of genetic testing for Stroke? A qualitative study among stroke-free SIREN-SIBS genomics study participants

OBJECTIVE

This study explored perceptions, preferences and attitudes towards disclosure of genetic testing results for stroke among stroke-free controls (and their family members) in the SIREN-SIBS Genomics Study, healthcare providers and policymakers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of key informant interviews with 61 participants recruited from community advisory boards (30) and health care providers (31) across seven sites in Nigeria and Ghana.

RESULTS

Major findings illustrate differences in the knowledge of genetic testing with superior knowledge among health care professionals. Relatives and religious leaders were opined as the best to receive the disclosure as they would be able to break the news to the patient in a culturally sensitive manner to reduce the likely resultant emotional outburst. Poor level of awareness of national guidelines for disclosing genetic results exist. Key facilitating factors for disclosure are education, enabling environment, involvement of religious and community leaders, campaigns, and possible treatment options. Disclosure inhibitors include inadequate information, fear of marital break-up or family displacement, fear of stigmatization, fear of isolation, religious beliefs, health worker attitude, and lack of preparedness to accept results.

CONCLUSIONS

These necessitate culturally sensitive interventions for continuing education, increased awareness and sustained engagement to equip all stakeholders in genetic testing disclosure process.

Clinical Cancer and Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Result-Sharing Behavior: Findings from HINTS 2020

INTRODUCTION

Sharing genetic test results with different stakeholders such as family members, healthcare providers and genetic counselors (HCP/GCs), spouses/partners, and friends is a health behavior of clinical importance in genomic medicine.

METHODS

Using nationally representative population-based data collected from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, cycle 4), we identified the prevalence and factors associated with genetic test result-sharing behavior for high-risk cancer tests, genetic health risk tests, and ancestry tests within four groups: HCP/GCs, first-degree relatives (FDRs), spouse/partner, and friend/other.

RESULTS

Overall, 68.4% of those who underwent high-risk cancer genetic testing shared their results with FDRs, whereas 89.9% shared with HCP/GCs. In adjusted multivariable analyses, women were nine times more likely than men to share (p = 0.006), and those with a personal history of cancer were less likely to share with HCP/GCs (OR = 0.025, p ≤ 0.001). Of those tested for genetic health risk, 66.5% shared with HCP/GCs, 38.7% with FDRs, 66.6% with a spouse/partner, 12.8% with a friend, and 14.1% did not share results with anyone. Of those who underwent ancestry testing, very few shared results with HCP/GCs (2.6%), whereas modest sharing was reported with FDRs, spouses/partners, and friends.

DISCUSSION

These data add empirical evidence about the population prevalence of genetic information sharing and serve as a metric for public engagement with genetic testing.

Cascade Testing for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: Should We Move Toward Direct Relative Contact? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Evidence-based guidelines recommend cascade genetic counseling and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes, providing relatives the opportunity for early detection and prevention of cancer. The current standard is for patients to contact and encourage relatives (patient-mediated contact) to undergo counseling and testing. Direct relative contact by the medical team or testing laboratory has shown promise but is complicated by privacy laws and lack of infrastructure. We sought to compare outcomes associated with patient-mediated and direct relative contact for hereditary cancer cascade genetic counseling and testing in the first meta-analysis on this topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO No.: CRD42020134276). We searched key electronic databases to identify studies evaluating hereditary cancer cascade testing. Eligible trials were subjected to meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Among relatives included in the meta-analysis, 48% (95% CI, 38 to 58) underwent cascade genetic counseling and 41% (95% CI, 34 to 48) cascade genetic testing. Compared with the patient-mediated approach, direct relative contact resulted in significantly higher uptake of genetic counseling for all relatives (63% [95% CI, 49 to 75] v 35% [95% CI, 24 to 48]) and genetic testing for first-degree relatives (62% [95% CI, 49 to 73] v 40% [95% CI, 32 to 48]). Methods of direct contact included telephone calls, letters, and e-mails; respective rates of genetic testing completion were 61% (95% CI, 51 to 70), 48% (95% CI, 37 to 59), and 48% (95% CI, 45 to 50).

CONCLUSION

Most relatives at risk for hereditary cancer do not undergo cascade genetic counseling and testing, forgoing potentially life-saving medical interventions. Compared with patient-mediated contact, direct relative contact increased rates of cascade genetic counseling and testing, arguing for a shift in the care delivery paradigm, to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials.

Incidence of Duchenne muscular dystrophy in the modern era; an Australian study

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), an X-linked recessive condition is maternally inherited in two-thirds of affected boys. It is important to establish carrier status of female relatives to restore reproductive confidence for non-carriers and facilitate reproductive options and cardiac surveillance for carriers. This study investigates disease incidence within an Australian model of cascade screening and evolving genetic diagnostic technologies. A retrospective population-based cohort study of all genetically and/or histopathologically confirmed males with DMD, born in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory was undertaken from 2002-2012. Cases were identified using state-wide molecular laboratory and clinical databases. The annual disease incidence and "theoretically" preventable cases were extrapolated over the study period. Proband genotype/phenotype, pedigree analysis, carrier-risk and extent of cascade screening were also determined. The cumulative incidence of disease was 19.7 per 100,000 male live births and 1 in 5076 live born males were diagnosed with DMD. Differences in disease incidence were not statistically different when compared between 2002-2007 and 2008-2012 (incidence rate ratio = 1.13, 95% CI 0.76-1.69, p = 0.52). The incidence rate ratio of theoretically preventable cases did not significantly change between 2002-2007 and 2008-2012 (incidence rate ratio = 2.07, 95% CI 0.58-9.21, p = 0.23). Current diagnostic and cascade screening models have limitations in their impact on disease incidence, due to a spectrum of logistical, patient and condition related factors. Innovative approaches to reduce DMD incidence may be better achieved by preconception or early pregnancy carrier screening, prenatal exome sequencing and newborn screening.

A pragmatic clinical trial of cascade testing for familial hypercholesterolemia

PURPOSE

We compared new cases detected per index case in familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) families with or without an identifiable monogenic etiology.

METHODS

We enrolled 52 FH probands with a pathogenic variant (FH^g+) in LDLR, APOB, or PCSK9 and 73 probands without such a variant (FH^g-). After direct contact by the study team, family members (FMs) of FH^g+ probands could opt-in for genetic testing and FMs of FH^g- probands were asked to provide a lipid profile. New cases were defined as presence of a pathogenic variant in FH^g+ families and as low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥155 mg/dL in FH^g- families.

RESULTS

Of 71 FH^g+ probands seen by a genetic counselor, 52 consented and identified 253 FMs (111 consented and were tested, yielding 48 new cases). Of 101 FH^g- probands who received counseling, 73 consented and identified 295 FMs (63 consented and were tested, yielding 17 new cases). New case detection per index case was significantly greater in FH^g+ than in FH^g- families (0.92 vs 0.23), a result of higher cascade testing uptake (43.9 vs 21.4%) and yield (43.2 vs 27.0%) in the former.

CONCLUSION

New case detection rate was significantly higher in FH families with a monogenic etiology than in those without such an etiology owing to greater uptake and yield of cascade testing.

Systematic cascade screening in the Danish Fabry Disease Centre: 20 years of a national single-centre experience

The lysosomal storage disorder Fabry disease is caused by deficient or absent activity of the GLA gene enzyme α-galactosidase A. In the present study we present the molecular and biochemical data of the Danish Fabry cohort and report 20 years' (2001-2020) experience in cascade genetic screening at the Danish National Fabry Disease Center. The Danish Fabry cohort consisted of 26 families, 18 index patients (9 males and 9 females, no available data for 8 index-patients) and 97 family members with a pathogenic GLA variant identified by cascade genetic testing (30 males and 67 females). Fourteen patients (5 males and 9 females; mean age of death 47.0 and 64.8 years respectively) died during follow-up. The completeness of the Fabry patient identification in the country has resulted in a cohort of balanced genotypes according to gender (twice number of females compared to males), indicating that the cohort was not biased by referral, and further resulted in earlier diagnosis of the disease by a lower age at diagnosis in family members compared to index-patients (mean age at diagnosis: index-patients 42.2 vs. family members 26.0 years). Six previously unreported disease-causing variants in the GLA gene were discovered. The nationwide screening and registration of Fabry disease families provide a unique possibility to establish a complete cohort of Fabry patients and to advance current knowledge of this inherited rare lysosomal storage disorder.

Feasibility, acceptability, and limited efficacy of health system-led familial risk notification: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation

Background

Genetic testing for pathogenic variants associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk can improve cancer outcomes through enhanced preventive care in both people with known variants and their biologic relatives. Cascade screening—the process of case-finding in relatives by notifying and inviting them to consider testing—currently relies on the patient to notify their own at-risk relatives. However, many of these relatives never learn they might be at risk. We developed and implemented a new health system-led familial genetic risk notification process where the care team offers to contact at-risk relatives directly. This protocol describes a study to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and limited efficacy of this intervention.

Methods

This feasibility study will use a single-arm, nonrandomized, mixed-methods prospective design.

We will enroll two groups of participants: probands and relatives of probands. Eligible probands are currently enrolled Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) members with an upcoming appointment for pre-test genetic counseling for hereditary Lynch syndrome, breast, or ovarian cancer. Eligible relatives, who do not have to be KPWA members, are first-and second-degree relatives of probands. During the appointment with the proband, the genetic counselor will determine whether the proband is appropriate for genetic testing and if so, which relatives might benefit from cascade testing. The genetic counselor then will offer to contact any or all identified relatives directly to discuss genetic risk and testing. The primary outcome of this study is the feasibility of the implemented familial notification process, which we will measure using quantitative and qualitative data on intervention reach, intervention acceptability, and limited efficacy. Analyses will be primarily descriptive and exploratory, with the intent of preparing for a future, larger trial of direct contact interventions.

Discussion

Our findings will provide new, foundational evidence for the creation of US-based familial notification systems that directly address logistical and ethical challenges while prioritizing the preferences of patients and families.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-022-01142-9.

Germline Pathogenic Variant Prevalence Among Latin American and US Hispanic Individuals Undergoing Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

To report on pathogenic germline variants detected among individuals undergoing genetic testing for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer (HBOC) from Latin America and compare them with self-reported Hispanic individuals from the United States.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, unrelated individuals with a personal/family history suggestive of HBOC who received clinician-ordered germline multigene sequencing were grouped according to the location of the ordering physician: group A, Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean; group B, South America; and group C, United States with individuals who self-reported Hispanic ethnicity. Relatives who underwent cascade testing were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Among 24,075 unrelated probands across all regions, most were female (94.9%) and reported a personal history suggestive of HBOC (range, 65.0%-80.6%); the mean age at testing was 49.1 ± 13.1 years. The average number of genes analyzed per patient was highest in group A (A 63 ± 28, B 56 ± 29, and C 40 ± 28). Between 9.1% and 18.7% of patients had pathogenic germline variants in HBOC genes (highest yield in group A), with the majority associated with high HBOC risk. Compared with US Hispanics individuals the overall yield was significantly higher in both Latin American regions (A v C P = 1.64×10^-9, B v C P < 2.2×10^-16). Rates of variants of uncertain significance were similar across all three regions (33.7%-42.6%). Cascade testing uptake was low in all regions (A 6.6%, B 4.5%, and C 1.9%).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the importance of multigene panel testing in Latin American individuals with newly diagnosed or history of HBOC, who can benefit from medical management changes including targeted therapies, eligibility to clinical trials, risk-reducing surgeries, surveillance and prevention of secondary malignancy, and genetic counseling and subsequent cascade testing of at-risk relatives.

Glaucoma Cascade Screening in a High Risk Afro-Caribbean Haitian Population: A Pilot Study

PRCIS

Glaucoma cascade screening in first-degree relatives (FDRs) of young Haitian glaucoma patients had high yield for diagnosing manifest and suspected glaucoma in 30.8% of those screened despite modest participation.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes of glaucoma cascade screening in FDRs (parents, siblings, and offspring) of Haitian juvenile open-angle glaucoma (JOAG) patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive index patients (Haitians with JOAG) were identified, and the number/type of FDRs residing in South Florida were recorded. These FDRs were invited for free glaucoma screening, which included a comprehensive ophthalmic exam, gonioscopy, automated visual field testing and optical coherence tomographic analysis of the retinal nerve fiber layers. FDR characteristics and clinical findings from screening are reported.

RESULTS

A total of 77 FDRs were invited, 26 (33.8%) agreed to undergo screening (18 females, 9 males), which revealed 2 (7.7%) with manifest glaucoma (mean age 77.5 y; one of whom was previously unaware of his glaucoma diagnosis), 6 (23.1%) with suspected glaucoma (mean age 29.8±18.3 y), and 18 (69.2%) without manifest or suspected glaucoma (mean age 37.2±21.8 y). Siblings of index patients were least likely to participate in cascade glaucoma screening when compared with index patients' parents or offspring. FDR eyes with manifest glaucoma had significantly worse best-corrected visual acuities, higher intraocular pressures, thinner central corneal thicknesses, and thinner circumferential papillary retinal nerve fiber layer thicknesses than those without glaucoma.

CONCLUSION

Glaucoma cascade screening of Haitian JOAG patients' FDRs revealed that 30.8% had suspected or manifest glaucoma. Future efforts centered on provider-initiated recruitment and improving public glaucoma awareness and education may increase screening participation.

A systematic review of theory-informed strategies used in interventions fostering family genetic risk communication

BACKGROUND

Inherited risk is a family issue. Identifying family members who carry a pathogenic genetic variant that increases risk of cancers and other chronic diseases can be lifesaving for those affected.

OBJECTIVE

The research questions are: (1) which family communication frameworks have been applied, (2) how do intervention strategies employed map to these theories, and (3) to what extent were families receptive to these strategies and communication increased?

METHODS

Manuscripts published between January 2010 and August 2020 were searched in three databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Nine intervention trials were identified. All interventions were evaluated in clinical genetic counseling contexts using at least one individual-level strategy (e.g. increase knowledge). Only three focused on dyadic conversations such as preparing for relatives' information needs.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review posed the question whether theoretically based approaches have been applied to foster family genetic risk communication. Greater attention needs to be paid to the utilization of dyadic level and family system level theories to guide intervention developments.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

We conclude by calling for accelerating and broadening the development of interventions to enable family communication about inherited risk that are theory-based, incorporate family-systems thinking, and are conducted outside of specialty clinic settings.

Gynecologic Cancer Risk and Genetics: Informing an Ideal Model of Gynecologic Cancer Prevention

Individuals with proven hereditary cancer syndrome (HCS) such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 have elevated rates of ovarian, breast, and other cancers. If these high-risk people can be identified before a cancer is diagnosed, risk-reducing interventions are highly effective and can be lifesaving. Despite this evidence, the vast majority of Canadians with HCS are unaware of their risk. In response to this unmet opportunity for prevention, the British Columbia Gynecologic Cancer Initiative convened a research summit “Gynecologic Cancer Prevention: Thinking Big, Thinking Differently” in Vancouver, Canada on 26 November 2021. The aim of the conference was to explore how hereditary cancer prevention via population-based genetic testing could decrease morbidity and mortality from gynecologic cancer. The summit invited local, national, and international experts to (1) discuss how genetic testing could be more broadly implemented in a Canadian system, (2) identify key research priorities in this topic and (3) outline the core essential elements required for such a program to be successful. This report summarizes the findings from this research summit, describes the current state of hereditary genetic programs in Canada, and outlines incremental steps that can be taken to improve prevention for high-risk Canadians now while developing an organized population-based hereditary cancer strategy.

The Impact of Proband Indication for Genetic Testing on the Uptake of Cascade Testing Among Relatives

Although multiple factors can influence the uptake of cascade genetic testing, the impact of proband indication has not been studied. We performed a retrospective, cross-sectional study comparing cascade genetic testing rates among relatives of probands who received either diagnostic germline testing or non-indication-based proactive screening via next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based multigene panels for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS) and/or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The proportion of probands with a medically actionable (positive) finding were calculated based on genes associated with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Tier 1 conditions, HCS genes, and FH genes. Among probands with a positive finding, cascade testing rates and influencing factors were assessed. A total of 270,715 probands were eligible for inclusion in the study (diagnostic n = 254,281,93.9%; proactive n = 16,434, 6.1%). A positive result in a gene associated with a CDC Tier 1 condition was identified in 10,520 diagnostic probands (4.1%) and 337 proactive probands (2.1%), leading to cascade testing among families of 3,305 diagnostic probands (31.4%) and 36 proactive probands (10.7%) (p < 0.0001). A positive result in an HCS gene was returned to 23,272 diagnostic probands (9.4%) and 970 proactive probands (6.1%), leading to cascade testing among families of 6,611 diagnostic probands (28.4%) and 89 proactive probands (9.2%) (p < 0.0001). Cascade testing due to a positive result in an HCS gene was more commonly pursued when the diagnostic proband was White, had a finding in a gene associated with a CDC Tier 1 condition, or had a personal history of cancer, or when the proactive proband was female. A positive result in an FH gene was returned to 1,647 diagnostic probands (25.3%) and 67 proactive probands (0.62%), leading to cascade testing among families of 360 diagnostic probands (21.9%) and 4 proactive probands (6.0%) (p < 0.01). Consistently higher rates of cascade testing among families of diagnostic probands may be due to a perceived urgency because of personal or family history of disease. Due to the proven clinical benefit of cascade testing, further research on obstacles to systematic implementation and uptake of testing for relatives of any proband with a medically actionable variant is warranted.

Accounting for Intergenerational Cascade Testing in Economic Evaluations of Clinical Genomics: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Clinical genomics is emerging as a diagnostic tool in the identification of blood relatives at risk of developing heritable diseases. Our objective was to identify how genetic cascade screening has been incorporated into health economic evaluations.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to identify how multiple generations of a family were included in economic evaluations of clinical genomic sequencing, how many and which relatives were included, and uptake rates. Databases were searched for full economic evaluations of genetic interventions that screened multiple generations of families and were in English language, and no restrictions were made for disease or publication type. Data were synthesized using a narrative approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included covering a range of diseases in various countries. Markov cohort models were mostly used with hypothetical populations and unsupported by clinical evidence. Cascade testing was either the primary intervention or secondary to the index cases. The number and type of relatives were based on assumptions or identified through population or family records, clinical registry data, or clinical literature. Studies included only immediate family members and the uptake of testing ranged between 20% and 100%. All interventions were reported as cost-effective, and a higher number of relatives was a key driver.

CONCLUSIONS

Several economic evaluations have considered the impacts of cascade testing interventions within clinical genomics. Ideally, models supported with high-quality clinical data are needed and, in their absence, transparent and justifiable assumptions of uptake rates and choices about including relatives. Consideration of more appropriate modeling types is required.

Use of a chatbot to increase uptake of cascade genetic testing

Successful proband-mediated family communication and subsequent cascade genetic testing uptake requires interventions that present information clearly, in sufficient detail, and with medical authority. To facilitate family communication for patients receiving clinically actionable results via the MyCode® Community Health Initiative, a Family Sharing Tool (FST) and a cascade chatbot were developed. FST is an electronic mechanism allowing patients to share genetic test results with relatives via chatbot. The cascade chatbot describes the proband's result, associated disease risks, and recommended management and captures whether the user is a blood relative or caregiver, sex, and relationship to the proband. FST and cascade chatbot uptake among MyCode® probands and relatives was tracked from August 2018 through February 2020. Cascade genetic testing uptake was collected from testing laboratories as number of cascades per proband. Fifty-eight percent (316/543) of probands consented to FST; 42% (227/543) declined. Receipt preferences were patient electronic health record (EHR) portal (52%), email (29%), and text (19%). Patient EHR portal users (p < 0.001) and younger patients were more likely to consent (p < 0.001). FST was deployed to 308 probands. Fifty-nine percent (183/308) opened; of those, 56% (102/183) used FST to send a cascade chatbot to relatives. These 102 probands shared a cascade chatbot with 377 relatives. Sixty-two percent (235/377) of relatives opened; of these, 69% (161/235) started, and of these, 57% (92/161) completed the cascade chatbot. Cascade genetic testing uptake was significantly greater among relatives of probands who consented to the FST (M = 2.34 cascades, SD = 2.10) than relatives of probands who declined (M = 1.40 cascades, SD = 0.82, p < 0.001). Proband age was not a significant predictor of cascade genetic testing uptake. Further work is needed to better understand factors impacting proband use of FST and relative use of cascade chatbots.

Application of motivational interviewing strategies with the extended parallel process model to improve risk communication for parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia

Current genetic counseling practice has not been found to significantly increase risk communication between family members. A more diverse set of genetic counseling approaches may be needed. A genetic counseling intervention based on motivational interviewing principles and the extended parallel process model was utilized to increase cascade outcomes within families with familial hypercholesterolemia, a common, underdiagnosed, and treatable condition. Parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia were invited to participate in an online pre-survey, single-session genetic counseling intervention, and post-intervention surveys as a part of the CHEERS (Cholesterol Evaluation to Explore Risk Screening) intervention. This study investigated the efficacy of a genetic counselor delivered motivational interviewing intervention and how parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia react by assessing family member cholesterol screening and risk communication to at-risk relatives. Transcripts were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for change talk using the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code version 2.1. Participant surveys were analyzed for self-reported extended parallel process constructs and motivations. Coincidence analysis was conducted to explore differences between those with and without positive cascade outcomes within 12 months after the intervention. On average, change talk increased during the session in order of the extended parallel process constructs (perceived severity, susceptibility, response efficacy, self-efficacy). Coincidence analysis revealed that 6 of the 7 cases with positive cascade outcomes were explained by either the presence of high change talk during the intervention or presence of positive motivations shortly after, while 5 of the 5 cases without a positive outcome lacked both of these key factors that were associated with cascade outcomes. Results of this study suggest that incorporating motivational interviewing and the extended parallel process model increases change talk and that the presence of either high levels of change talk or positive motivations is associated with positive cascade outcomes.

Barriers to family history knowledge and family communication among LGBTQ+ individuals in the context of hereditary cancer risk assessment

Openness about identity as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual orientations and gender identities (LGBTQ+) may cause strain on relationships between family members, which could lead to limited knowledge of cancer family history and reduced communication with family members. As a result, members of the LGBTQ+ community may have more difficulty accessing genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk. We applied a mixed-methods approach to explore potential barriers to knowledge of cancer family history and family communication among participants of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study who self-identified as LGBTQ+. We assessed perceptions of family functioning and communication of genetic test results to family members using survey tools and supplemented these data with 20 in-depth interviews to further assess participant perspectives and experiences. LGBTQ+ participants were more likely to report unhealthy family functioning on the survey tool, and some interviewees endorsed that openness about their LGBTQ+ identity led to strained family relationships and reduced communication about their family history of cancer. Overall, this study identified barriers that may be faced by members of the LGBTQ+ community which could limit their ability to access genetic counseling services for inherited cancer risk.

Hereditary cancer panel testing challenges and solutions for the latinx community: costs, access, and variants

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancers (HBOCs) are common among the Latinx population, and risk testing is recommended using multi-gene hereditary cancer panels (HCPs). However, little is known about how payer reimbursement and out-of-pocket expenses impact provider ordering of HCP in the Latinx population. Our objective is to describe key challenges and possible solutions for HCP testing in the Latinx population. As part of a larger study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with key provider informants (genetic counselors, oncologist, nurse practitioner) from safety-net institutions in the San Francisco Bay Area. We used a deductive thematic analysis approach to summarize themes around challenges and possible solutions to facilitating HCP testing in Latinx patients. We found few financial barriers for HCP testing for the Latinx population due to laboratory patient assistance programs that cover testing at low or no cost to patients. However, we found potential challenges related to the sustainability of low-cost testing and out-of-pocket expenses for patients, access to cascade testing for family members, and pathogenic variants specific to Latinx. Providers questioned whether current laboratory payment programs that decrease barriers to testing are sustainable and suggested solutions for accessing cascade testing and ensuring variants specific to the Latinx population were included in testing. The use of laboratories with payment assistance programs reduces barriers to HCP testing among the US population; however, other barriers are present that may impact testing use in the Latinx population and must be addressed to ensure equitable access to HCP testing for this population.

Characteristics and experiences of patients from a community-based and consumer-directed hereditary cancer population screening initiative

A clinical hereditary cancer population screening initiative, called Information is Power, began in North Alabama in 2015. After 4 years of the initiative, we were interested in exploring (1) the characteristics and motivations for patients who self-refer to population genetic testing, (2) how patients make decisions on testing, (3) what patients do with results, and (4) patient perceptions of benefits and limitations after undergoing population genetic testing. Patients who consented to research recontact at time of test ordering were sent an electronic survey with the option for a follow-up phone interview. Among the 2,918 eligible patients, 239 responded to the survey and 19 completed an interview. Survey and interview participants were highly educated information seekers motivated by learning more about their health. Those who were previously interested in hereditary cancer testing reported barriers were cost and insurance coverage, access to testing, and uncertainty how results could impact their health. Many participants (77%) communicated with family and friends about their decision to test and communicated about test results. Fewer participants (23%) discussed the decision to test with their healthcare providers; however, 58% of participants discussed their test results with a healthcare provider. Most people (96%) with negative results accurately recalled their results. In contrast, three out of 11 positive results for heterozygous MUTYH, PALB2, and BRCA2 reported receiving negative results. This study contributes to knowledge on population genetic testing and may guide other population genetic testing programs as they develop enrollment materials and educational materials and consider downstream needs of population genetic testing participants.

Risk assessment and genetic counseling for Lynch syndrome - Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer

Identifying individuals who have Lynch syndrome involves a complex diagnostic workup that includes taking a detailed family history and a combination of various tests such as immunohistochemistry and/or molecular which may be germline and/or somatic. The National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer have come together to publish this practice resource for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome. The purpose of this practice resource was to provide guidance and a testing algorithm for Lynch syndrome as well as recommendations on when to offer testing. This practice resource does not replace a consultation with a genetics professional. This practice resource includes explanations in support of this and a summary of background data. While this practice resource is not intended to serve as a review of Lynch syndrome, it includes a discussion of background information and cites a number of key publications which should be reviewed for a more in-depth understanding. This practice resource is intended for genetic counselors, geneticists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, obstetricians and gynecologists, nurses, and other healthcare providers who evaluate patients for Lynch syndrome.

Evaluation of Classic, Attenuated, and Oligopolyposis of the Colon

The goal of this review is to provide an overview of evaluating patients with adenomatous polyposis of the colon, including elements such as generating a differential diagnosis, referral considerations for genetic testing, genetic testing options, and expected outcomes from genetic testing in these individuals. In more recent years, adenomatous colonic polyposis has evolved beyond the more robustly characterized familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) now encompassing more newly described genes and associated syndromes. Technological innovation, from whole-exome sequencing to multigene panel testing, has dramatically increased the amount of genotypic and phenotypic data amassed in adenomatous polyposis cohorts, which has contributed greatly to informing diagnosis and clinical management of affected individuals and their families.

Applying citizen science to engage families affected by ovarian cancer in developing genetic service outreach strategies

Citizen science (CS) approaches involving non-professional researchers (citizens) as research collaborators has been used infrequently in health promotion generally and specifically, in cancer prevention. Standardized CS approaches may be especially useful for developing communication interventions to encourage families to consider cancer genetic services. We engaged survivors of ovarian cancer and their close relatives as CS collaborators to collect and help interpret data to inform content for a website, printed invitation materials, and short-message reminders. We applied an implementation quality framework, and posed four research questions regarding the feasibility of CS: recruitment, data collection, data quality and evaluation of the experience. CS members were recruited through three networks: clinical sites, local and national cancer support organizations, and online ovarian cancer patient support groups. The professional research team operationalized theory-aligned CS tasks, five data collection options, question banks/scripts for creating surveys, structured interviews, online training and ongoing support from research coaches. 14 CS members agreed to the 12-week and 20-hour commitment for an honorarium. CS members opted to do both qualitative and quantitative assessments. CS members collected 261 surveys and 39 structured interviews. The largest number of surveys were collected for Task 1 (n = 102) to assess survivors' reactions to different possible options for motivating survivors to visit a study website; 77% of this data were complete (i.e., no missing values). Data collected for tasks 2, 3, 4, and 5 (e.g., assessment of survivors' and relatives' respective communication preferences) ranged from 10 to 58 surveys (80% to 84% completeness). All data were collected within the specified time frame. CSs reported 17 hours of work on average and regarded the experience positively. Our experience suggests that CS engagement is feasible, can yield comprehensive quantitative and qualitative data, and is achievable in a relatively a short timeline.