Cross-sectional clinical cancer genomics community of practice survey analysis of provider attitudes and beliefs regarding the use of deceased family member tissue to guide living family member genetic cancer risk assessment.


Journal

Journal of genetic counseling
ISSN: 1573-3599
Titre abrégé: J Genet Couns
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9206865

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2022
Historique:
revised: 18 04 2022
received: 18 08 2021
accepted: 24 04 2022
pubmed: 27 5 2022
medline: 5 10 2022
entrez: 26 5 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Next-generation tumor tissue sequencing techniques may result in the detection of putative germline pathogenic variants (PVs), raising the possibility that germline cancer predisposition could be identified from archival medical tissue samples of deceased relatives. The approach, termed traceback, is designed to inform risk management recommendations for living family members. Provider perspectives regarding traceback testing have not yet been explored, so we conducted a cross-sectional survey of Clinical Cancer Genomics Community of Practice providers regarding their attitudes and beliefs toward traceback testing. Self-reported demographics, provider characteristics, attitudes and perceived barriers were collected. We evaluated responses in the context of whether providers had previous experience with traceback testing. Data were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact testing. Among 207 respondents (of 816 eligible), most were women (89.4%), white (85.5%), and not Hispanic or Latino (89.7%). US-based providers represented the majority of respondents (87.4%). Relatively, few providers 32 of 207 (15.5%) had previous experience with traceback. Among the individuals without experience in traceback, 84.0% thought there would be barriers to implementation; however, only 68.8% of individuals with previous traceback experience agreed (p = .04). Respondents in both groups thought that traceback would be valuable in their practice (82.6%, p = .22) and that they would feel comfortable discussing the concept (83.6%, p = .83), interpreting the results (72.2%, p = .24), and discussing the results with their patients (80.7%, p = .38). Patient interest and cost were seen as less of a barrier by those with experience with traceback testing. Recurrent themes obtained in open-ended responses are also presented. Overall, providers believe that traceback would be a valuable tool in their practice. Individuals with previous experience identified less barriers with implementation of this testing, highlighting an area for future research and education.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35617031
doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1587
pmc: PMC9529780
mid: NIHMS1801610
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1164-1172

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R25 CA171998
Pays : United States
Organisme : Breast Cancer Research Foundation
ID : 20-172
Organisme : Breast Cancer Research Foundation
ID : 19-172
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : RC4 CA153828
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : K08 CA234394
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA033572
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© 2022 National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Références

Ann Surg Oncol. 1998 Oct-Nov;5(7):567-8
pubmed: 9831100
CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Sep-Oct;61(5):327-59
pubmed: 21858794
Br J Cancer. 2000 Feb;82(3):705-11
pubmed: 10682686
JAMA Oncol. 2016 Jun 1;2(6):723-4
pubmed: 26869327
J Cancer Educ. 2012 Jun;27(2):217-25
pubmed: 22328115
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jul 10;35(20):2329-2337
pubmed: 28398847
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Oct 16;147(8):573-7
pubmed: 17938396
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2015 Dec;19(12):657-65
pubmed: 26539620
Eur J Hum Genet. 2021 May;29(5):861-871
pubmed: 33654310
Eur J Med Genet. 2017 Oct;60(10):553-558
pubmed: 28774848
Genet Epidemiol. 2018 Feb;42(1):117-122
pubmed: 29193313

Auteurs

Bita Nehoray (B)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Thomas P Slavin (TP)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Can-Lan Sun (CL)

Department of Supportive Care Medicine, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Karen Hurley (K)

Center for Behavioral Health, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Elisabeth King (E)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Kevin K Tsang (KK)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Aleck Cervantes (A)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Janet V Mokhnatkin (JV)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Sharon Sand (S)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Rosa Mejia (R)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Anne Reb (A)

Division of Nursing Research and Education, Department of Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Goli Samimi (G)

Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Stacy Gray (S)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Kathleen R Blazer (KR)

Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Departments of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research and Population Sciences, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA.

Jeffrey N Weitzel (JN)

Latin American School of Oncology, Sierra Madre, California, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH