1
|
Canedo JR, Villalta-Gil V, Grijalva CG, Schlundt D, Jerome RN, Wilkins CH. How do Hispanics/Latinos Perceive and Value the Return of Research Results? Hisp Health Care Int 2022; 20:238-247. [PMID: 35018873 PMCID: PMC9273811 DOI: 10.1177/15404153211070821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Interest in the return of research results has been increasing; however, little is known about how Hispanics/Latinos perceive and value receiving results. This study examined differences among Hispanics/Latinos by education and income in the experience and expectations about the return of research results, perceived value of specific types of information, and the least and most valuable specific information. Method: Retrospective observational design using a cross-sectional national survey sample of Hispanics/Latinos (n = 327). Results: Higher educational attainment was positively associated with the expectation to receive research results, likelihood to participate in research if given study findings, and likelihood to trust researchers if given results. Higher income was positively associated with the perceived value of getting results. Respondents with higher education specifically perceived greater value in information about how lifestyle and genetics affect their risk of disease, how genetics affect how they respond to medications, their ancestry, available clinical trials near them, and how to connect with other study participants. Respondents with higher income perceived greater value in information about how genetics affect their risk of disease and how they respond to medications. Conclusion: The findings offer important insights for planning research initiatives and for developing culturally targeted educational materials for Hispanics/Latinos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan R Canedo
- 12328Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | | | | | - David Schlundt
- 12328Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | | | - Consuelo H Wilkins
- 12328Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
- 435391Meharry-Vanderbilt Alliance, Nashville, TN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Murakami K, Pagano I, Furuya H, Daskivich T, Mori D, Rosser CJ. Clinical Utility of Oncuria™, a Multiplexed Liquid Biopsy for the Non-Invasive Detection of Bladder Cancer-A Pilot Study. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:131. [PMID: 35054300 PMCID: PMC8774623 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12010131] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2021] [Revised: 01/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Oncuria™ is a validated quantitative multiplex immunoassay capable of detecting bladder cancer from a voided urine sample. Herein, we sought to determine whether Oncuria™ affects physicians' use of non-invasive and invasive diagnostic tests for microhematuria, gross hematuria, and bladder cancer surveillance. We conducted a survey-based study to assess physician management of nine clinical scenarios involving real-world data from patients with gross hematuria, microhematuria, and bladder cancer on surveillance. We randomly sampled 15 practicing urologists and generated data including 135 patient-by-urologist interactions and 2160 decision points. Urologists recommended a selection of diagnostic tests and procedures before and after Oncuria™ results were provided. We assessed changes in provider use of non-invasive and invasive diagnostic tests after Oncuria™ results were provided. Over 90% of all urologists changed their diagnostic behavior in at least one patient case with the addition of Oncuria™ results. The total number of diagnostic procedures was reduced by 31% following the disclosure of a negative Oncuria™ test and 27% following the disclosure of a positive Oncuria™ test. This is pilot study has the potential to shed light on the analysis of our four large multicenter international studies deploying OncuriaTM. The Oncuria™ urine-based test, a molecular diagnostic capable of ruling out the presence of bladder cancer, reduces both unnecessary invasive and non-invasive diagnostics and has the potential to reduce costs and improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaoru Murakami
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA; (K.M.); (H.F.)
| | - Ian Pagano
- Cancer Prevention and Control Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA;
| | - Hideki Furuya
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA; (K.M.); (H.F.)
| | - Timothy Daskivich
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Division of Urology, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA;
| | - Dave Mori
- Nonagen Bioscience Corporation, Los Angeles, CA 90010, USA;
| | - Charles J. Rosser
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA; (K.M.); (H.F.)
- Nonagen Bioscience Corporation, Los Angeles, CA 90010, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Meagher KM, Curtis SH, Borucki S, Beck A, Srinivasan T, Cheema A, Sharp RR. Communicating unexpected pharmacogenomic results to biobank contributors: A focus group study. Patient Educ Couns 2021; 104:242-249. [PMID: 32919825 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.08.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2020] [Revised: 07/08/2020] [Accepted: 08/19/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The goals of this study were to explore 1) the impact of returning unexpected pharmacogenomic (PGx) results to biobank contributors, and 2) participant views about improving communication. METHODS We conducted a qualitative focus group study with biobank participants (N = 54) who were notified by mail of an individual research result indicating increased risk for adverse events associated with the common cancer drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). We employed a framework approach for analysis. RESULTS Our results revealed three themes illustrating participants' questions and uncertainty, especially regarding how to share results with health providers and family members, and remember them over time. Participants valued results for themselves and others, and for the future of medicine. Risk perception was framed by health identity. "Toxicity narratives," or familiarity with another's adverse reaction to chemotherapy, increased the sense of importance participants reported. CONCLUSION These focus group results highlight research participant remaining questions and high valuation of PGx results, even when unexpected. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS We identify PGx research participants' needs for clear clinical translation messaging that attends to health identity, pragmatics of sharing information with family members, and patient perceptions of barriers to transferring research results to a clinical context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen M Meagher
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | - Susan H Curtis
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | | | - Annika Beck
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
| | | | - Amal Cheema
- Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, USA
| | - Richard R Sharp
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lemke AA, Hulick PJ, Wake DT, Wang C, Sereika AW, Yu KD, Glaser NS, Dunnenberger HM. Patient perspectives following pharmacogenomics results disclosure in an integrated health system. Pharmacogenomics 2018; 19:321-331. [DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2017-0191] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To assess patient perceptions and utilization of pharmacogenomics (PGx) testing in an integrated community health system. Methods: Fifty-seven patients completed an online survey assessing their experiences with PGx testing offered through two methods: a designated PGx clinic or direct access in-home testing. Results: The majority of participants perceived PGx testing as helpful in their healthcare and reported understanding their results. Some had concerns about privacy and discrimination; most lacked familiarity with the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. There were no significant differences in views between participants tested through either model. Conclusion: Participants reported value in both methods of PGx testing. Patient experiences, understanding and result utilization will play an important role in informing future development and implementation of PGx programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy A Lemke
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Peter J Hulick
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Dyson T Wake
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Chi Wang
- Biostatistics & Research Informatics, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 146, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Annette W Sereika
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Kristen Dilzell Yu
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Nicole S Glaser
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| | - Henry M Dunnenberger
- Center for Personalized Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 1001 University Place, Suite 160, Evanston, IL 60201, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Korol S, Hurlimann T, Godard B, de Denus S. Disclosure of individual pharmacogenomic results in research projects: when and what kind of information to return to research participants. Pharmacogenomics 2014; 14:675-88. [PMID: 23570470 DOI: 10.2217/pgs.13.50] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
In the growing field of genomics, the utility of returning certain research results to participants has become a highly debated issue. Existing guidelines are not explicit as to the kind of genomic information that should be returned to research participants. Moreover, very few current recommendations and articles in the literature address the return of pharmacogenomic results. Although genetics and pharmacogenomics have many similarities, the circumstances in which disclosure could have a benefit for the participants are different. This review aims to describe the conditions in which disclosure of pharmacogenomic results is appropriate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Korol
- Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sanderson SC, Diefenbach MA, Zinberg R, Horowitz CR, Smirnoff M, Zweig M, Streicher S, Jabs EW, Richardson LD. Willingness to participate in genomics research and desire for personal results among underrepresented minority patients: a structured interview study. J Community Genet 2013; 4:469-82. [PMID: 23794263 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-013-0154-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2012] [Accepted: 06/09/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients from traditionally underrepresented communities need to be involved in discussions around genomics research including attitudes towards participation and receiving personal results. Structured interviews, including open-ended and closed-ended questions, were conducted with 205 patients in an inner-city hospital outpatient clinic: 48 % of participants self-identified as Black or African American, 29 % Hispanic, 10 % White; 49 % had an annual household income of <$20,000. When the potential for personal results to be returned was not mentioned, 82 % of participants were willing to participate in genomics research. Reasons for willingness fell into four themes: altruism; benefit to family members; personal health benefit; personal curiosity and improving understanding. Reasons for being unwilling fell into five themes: negative perception of research; not personally relevant; negative feelings about procedures (e.g., blood draws); practical barriers; and fear of results. Participants were more likely to report that they would participate in genomics research if personal results were offered than if they were not offered (89 vs. 62 % respectively, p < 0.001). Participants were more interested in receiving personal genomic risk results for cancer, heart disease and type 2 diabetes than obesity (89, 89, 91, 80 % respectively, all p < 0.001). The only characteristic consistently associated with interest in receiving personal results was disease-specific worry. There was considerable willingness to participate in and desire for personal results from genomics research in this sample of predominantly low-income, Hispanic and African American patients. When returning results is not practical, or even when it is, alternatively or additionally providing generic information about genomics and health may also be a valuable commodity to underrepresented minority and other populations considering participating in genomics research.
Collapse
|