scholarly journals Integrating genetic counseling and testing in the pediatric oncology setting: Parental attitudes and influencing factors

Author(s):  
Lauren R. Desrosiers ◽  
Emily Quinn ◽  
Stuart Cramer ◽  
Whitney Dobek
2020 ◽  
pp. 991-1008
Author(s):  
Hemant Malhotra ◽  
Pradnya Kowtal ◽  
Nikita Mehra ◽  
Raja Pramank ◽  
Rajiv Sarin ◽  
...  

PURPOSE Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome is primarily characterized by mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes. There are several barriers to the implementation of genetic testing and counseling in India that may affect clinical decisions. These consensus recommendations were therefore convened as a collaborative effort to improve testing and management of HBOC in India. DESIGN Recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary group of experts from the Indian Society of Medical and Pediatric Oncology and some invited experts on the basis of graded evidence from the literature and using a formal Delphi process to help reach consensus. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to source relevant articles. RESULTS This consensus statement provides practical insight into identifying patients who should undergo genetic counseling and testing on the basis of assessments of family and ancestry and personal history of HBOC. It discusses the need and significance of genetic counselors and medical professionals who have the necessary expertise in genetic counseling and testing. Recommendations elucidate requirements of pretest counseling, including discussions on genetic variants of uncertain significance and risk reduction options. The group of experts recommended single-site mutation testing in families with a known mutation and next-generation sequencing coupled with multiplex ligation probe amplification for the detection of large genomic rearrangements for unknown mutations. Recommendations for surgical and lifestyle-related risk reduction approaches and management using poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are also detailed. CONCLUSION With rapid strides being made in the field of genetic testing/counseling in India, more oncologists are expected to include genetic testing/counseling as part of their clinical practice. These consensus recommendations are anticipated to help homogenize genetic testing and management of HBOC in India for improved patient care.


Author(s):  
Huanghe Ding ◽  
Arnethea L. Sutton ◽  
Alejandra Hurtado‐de‐Mendoza ◽  
Vanessa B. Sheppard

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2729
Author(s):  
Julie Lapointe ◽  
Michel Dorval ◽  
Jocelyne Chiquette ◽  
Yann Joly ◽  
Jason Robert Guertin ◽  
...  

Medical genetic services are facing an unprecedented demand for counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in a context of limited resources. To help resolve this issue, a collaborative oncogenetic model was recently developed and implemented at the CHU de Québec-Université Laval; Quebec; Canada. Here, we present the protocol of the C-MOnGene (Collaborative Model in OncoGenetics) study, funded to examine the context in which the model was implemented and document the lessons that can be learned to optimize the delivery of oncogenetic services. Within three years of implementation, the model allowed researchers to double the annual number of patients seen in genetic counseling. The average number of days between genetic counseling and disclosure of test results significantly decreased. Group counseling sessions improved participants’ understanding of breast cancer risk and increased knowledge of breast cancer and genetics and a large majority of them reported to be overwhelmingly satisfied with the process. These quality and performance indicators suggest this oncogenetic model offers a flexible, patient-centered and efficient genetic counseling and testing for HBOC. By identifying the critical facilitating factors and barriers, our study will provide an evidence base for organizations interested in transitioning to an oncogenetic model integrated into oncology care; including teams that are not specialized but are trained in genetics.


Breast Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Julia Dick ◽  
Viktoria Aue ◽  
Simone Wesselmann ◽  
Anne Brédart ◽  
Sylvie Dolbeault ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> In recent years, germline testing of women with a risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer has increased rapidly. This is due to lower costs for new high-throughput sequencing technologies and the manifold preventive and therapeutic options for germline mutation carriers. The growing demand for genetic counseling meets a shortfall of counselors and illustrates the need to involve the treating clinicians in the genetic testing process. This survey was undertaken to assess their state of knowledge and training needs in the field of genetic counseling and testing. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A cross-sectional survey within the European Bridges Study (Breast Cancer Risk after Diagnostic Gene Sequencing) was conducted among physician members (<i>n</i> = 111) of the German Cancer Society who were primarily gynecologists. It was designed to examine their experience in genetic counseling and testing. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Overall, the study revealed a need for training in risk communication and clinical recommendations for persons at risk. One-third of respondents communicated only relative disease risks (31.5%) instead of absolute disease risks in manageable time spans. Moreover, almost one-third of the respondents (31.2%) communicated bilateral and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy as an option for healthy women and unilateral-diseased breast cancer patients without mutations in high-risk genes (e.g. <i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2)</i>. Most respondents expressed training needs in the field of risk assessment models, the clinical interpretation of genetic test results, and the decision-making process. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The survey demonstrates a gap of genetic and risk literacy in a relevant proportion of physicians and the need for appropriate training concepts.


Author(s):  
Christian F. Singer ◽  
Yen Y. Tan ◽  
Christine Rappaport

AbstractAimThe aim of this study is to review the legal implications, the technology, the indications and the management of women with a familial background of breast and/or ovarian cancer.MethodsWe have reviewed the literature and national Austrian guidelines to describe the uptake of genetic counseling and the management options offered in Austria.ResultsGenetic testing for theConclusionWhile readily available country-wide counseling has led to an increase in counseling and testing, Austrian legislation mandates “non-directional counseling” resulting in a comparatively low uptake of prophylactic surgery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10524-10524
Author(s):  
Alexandra Wehbe ◽  
Mark A. Manning ◽  
Hadeel Assad ◽  
Kristen Purrington ◽  
Michael S. Simon

10524 Background: Carriers of pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes have an elevated risk of developing breast, ovarian, and other cancers.We conducted a medical record review to determine the uptake of genetic counseling and testing in a clinic-based population of women with breast cancer. Methods: Medical records of 150 women with breast cancer seen at the Karmanos Cancer Institute between January-December 2018 were reviewed to determine the proportion eligible for genetic testing according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We also assessed genetics referral rates, appointment completion and results of genetic testing. Using chi-square and ANOVA tests, we analyzed the association of demographic and clinical factors with eligibility and referral to genetic counseling. Results: The average age of diagnosis was 57.1 years old, with 68.7% of women diagnosed with stage I-III disease, and 31.3% diagnosed with stage IV disease. There were 91 (60.7%) women who met NCCN criteria for genetic testing, of which 46.2% ultimately underwent genetic testing. Eligible women were more likely to be younger (52.6 vs. 64.0 years old), White (75.0% vs. 54.5%), and have Medicaid (75.0%) or private insurance (72.9%) vs. Medicare (44.8%). Women who met NCCN criteria were 3.5 times more likely to be referred for genetic counseling than those that did not meet eligibility criteria. Women were also more likely to be referred if they had early-stage disease compared to stage IV (67.8% vs. 48.3%), and Medicaid or private insurance compared to Medicare (71.4%, 72.0% and 40.0%, respectively). Of eligible women, 59.3% had a genetic counseling appointment scheduled, and of those, 78.0% attended their appointment. There were no apparent differences in appointment completion based on race with similar percentages of Black and White women completing their appointments (74.0% and 77.0% respectively). Women with stage IV disease were more likely to complete their appointments (83.0%) compared to women with stages I-III (74.0%) and fewer women with Medicare completed their genetic counseling appointment (56.0%) compared to women with Medicaid (83.0%) and women with private insurance (83.0%). Among women who attended their appointment, 95.9% underwent genetic testing. Of women who had genetic testing, 8.5% had a pathogenic variant and 30.4% had a variant of unknown significance. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that lack of genetic counseling referrals contribute to a gap between the need for and completion of genetic testing. By understanding barriers to genetic counseling and testing, future clinical initiatives could effectively improve accessibility to genetic counseling services.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e1481-e1488
Author(s):  
Stephanie L. Graff ◽  
Jared M. Holder ◽  
Lindsay E. Sears ◽  
Dax Kurbegov

PURPOSE: Genetic counseling and testing (GC/T) for breast cancer–associated genetic mutations are important components in the appropriate management of newly diagnosed breast cancer. We initiated pathways to help appropriately select patients who meet criteria for GC/T referral (GC/T-R) across the Sarah Cannon Cancer Institute Network. This study evaluated physician pathway training as a means to improve access to GC/T-R. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study, we collected data from 7 regions across 6 states, identifying 3,113 patients eligible for GC/T. Patients were divided into 3 defined cohorts: patients treated before implementation of pathways (n = 988), patients treated by non-pathway physicians after pathways were established (n = 1,094), and patients treated by pathway-trained physicians (n = 1,031). Pathways were established in March 2016. Nurse navigators documented eligible patients who were referred for GC/T within a care coordination software system. RESULTS: Eligible patients were referred for GC/T 71.77% of the time if treated on pathways and only 36.47% of the time if treated off pathways. On-pathway patients eligible for GC/T also received testing referral at a higher rate than pre-pathway patients (21.36%). CONCLUSION: After implementation of pathways and appropriate training of physicians on those pathways, GC/T-R among appropriate patients significantly improved. Pathway training represents a potential solution to improve GC/T-R among patients with breast cancer.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document