Pathogenic germline variants in patients with endometrial cancer of diverse ancestry.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in outcomes exist in endometrial cancer (EC). The contribution of ancestry-based variations in germline pathogenic variants (gPVs) is unknown. METHODS: Germline assessment of ≥76 cancer predisposition genes was performed in patients with EC undergoing tumor-normal Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets sequencing from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2021. Self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry data classified patients into groups. Genetic ancestry was inferred from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets. Rates of gPV and genetic counseling were compared by ancestry. RESULTS: Among 1625 patients with EC, 216 (13%) had gPVs; 15 had >1 gPV. Rates of gPV varied by self-reported ancestry (Ashkenazi Jewish, 40/202 [20%]; Asian, 15/124 [12%]; Black/African American (AA), 12/171 [7.0%]; Hispanic, 15/124 [12%]; non-Hispanic (NH) White, 129/927 [14%]; missing, 5/77 [6.5%]; p = .009], with similar findings by genetic ancestry (p < .001). We observed a lower likelihood of gPVs in patients of Black/AA (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.81) and African (AFR) ancestry (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85) and a higher likelihood in patients of Ashkenazi Jewish genetic ancestry (OR, 1.62; 95% CI; 1.11-2.34) compared with patients of non-Hispanic White/European ancestry, even after adjustment for age and molecular subtype. Somatic landscape influenced gPVs with lower rates of microsatellite instability-high tumors in patients of Black/AA and AFR ancestry. Among those with newly identified gPVs (n = 114), 102 (89%) were seen for genetic counseling, with lowest rates among Black/AA (75%) and AFR patients (67%). CONCLUSIONS: In those with EC, gPV and genetic counseling varied by ancestry, with lowest rates among Black/AA and AFR patients, potentially contributing to disparities in outcomes given implications for treatment and cancer prevention. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Black women with endometrial cancer do worse than White women, and there are many reasons for this disparity. Certain genetic changes from birth (mutations) can increase the risk of cancer, and it is unknown if rates of these changes are different between different ancestry groups. Genetic mutations in 1625 diverse women with endometrial cancer were studied and the lowest rates of mutations and genetic counseling were found in Black and African ancestry women. This could affect their treatment options as well as their families and may make disparities worse.

Mainstreaming in parallel with ovarian cancer tumor testing to improve genetic testing uptake.

OBJECTIVES: Although genetic testing (GT) is universally recommended for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), rates are low (34%). In 1/2019, we implemented mainstreaming-GT in parallel with tumor testing via MSK-IMPACT within oncology clinics. We sought to determine GT rates pre/post-mainstreaming and patient characteristics associated with GT. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed EOC seen at our institution from 7/1/2015-3/31/2022 were included. Clinical data were abstracted including social determinants of health (SDOH) variables, race/ethnicity, marital status, insurance, language, comorbidities, employment, and Yost index, a measure of socioeconomic status. GT rates were calculated overall and pre-/post-mainstreaming (1/2019). Logistic regression models were fit to identify variables associated with GT. RESULTS: Of 1742 patients with EOC, 1591 (91%) underwent GT. Rates of GT increased from 87% to 95% after mainstreaming (p < 0.001). Among 151 patients not undergoing GT, major reasons were lack of provider recommendation (n = 76, 50%) and logistical issues (n = 38, 25%) with few declining (n = 14, 9%) or having medical complications preventing GT (n = 7, 4.6%). High-grade serous histology, advanced stage (III/IV), and having a spouse/partner were associated with increased GT uptake (p < 0.01). Among SDOH variables, there were no differences by insurance, Yost score, language, comorbidities, employment, or race/ethnicity. In multivariable models, likelihood of GT increased with mainstreaming, even after adjustment for histology, stage, and marital status (OR 3.77; 95% CI: 2.56-5.66). CONCLUSIONS: Mainstreaming increased the likelihood of GT in patients with EOC. We found lower testing rates in patients without partners/spouses, non-high-grade serous histology, and early-stage disease, representing potential areas for future interventions.

Clinical Impact of a Rapid Genetic Testing Model for Advanced Prostate Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing may alter clinical management for individuals with metastatic prostate cancer by identifying additional therapies. Traditional counseling models are unlikely to enable time-sensitive therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and clinical impact of an alternative hereditary genetic testing model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of a multicenter, single-arm prospective trial, individuals with advanced prostate cancer were referred by their oncologist for testing of 14 genes associated with hereditary prostate cancer. Pretest education (brochure and video) was provided in the oncology clinic. Questionnaires assessing participant satisfaction with both pretest education and decision to undergo genetic testing were collected. A genetic counselor contacted participants by phone to obtain family history and discuss results. Medical records were queried to determine whether a change in clinical management was discussed. RESULTS: Of 501 participants consented to germline analysis, 51 (10.2%) had at least 1 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant. Change in treatment was discussed with 22/48 (45.8%) of eligible participants who tested positive. Feasibility of this model was assessed by participant satisfaction and turnaround time. Average±SD satisfaction with the pretest education (15.5±2.2, 4-20 scale) and with the decision to undergo genetic testing (17.1±2.9, 4-20 scale) were both high. Results were returned 20 days (median) after sample collection. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist-initiated germline genetic testing in collaboration with a genetic counselor is a feasible approach to testing advanced prostate cancer patients with impactful clinical actionability. The testing model and educational material serve as resources to clinicians treating prostate cancer patients.

Associations between social COVID-19 exposure and psychological functioning.

The negative consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health have been widely reported, but less is known about how the impact of COVID-19 on others in one's social circle shapes these high distress levels. This study examines associations between social COVID-19 exposure-knowing someone who had a COVID-19 infection-and psychological functioning, as well as whether socio-demographic factors moderate these relationships. In June 2020, respondents (N = 343) from clinics in Tampa, Florida, U.S.A. reported whether they had social COVID-19 exposure, anxiety, depression, and stress, and other COVID-19-related concerns. Social COVID-19 exposure was associated with increased anxiety, stress, and concerns about a family member getting sick, and concerns about drinking and substance use. Several associations between exposure and psychological functioning were stronger in women, younger people, and people with lower income, implying these groups face elevated psychological risks due to the pandemic, and should be prioritized in mental health recovery efforts.

Measuring high-risk parents' opinions about direct-to-consumer genetic testing for adult-onset inherited cancer syndromes in their adolescent and young adult children.

Neither direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing nor predictive genetic testing for adult-onset conditions is recommended for minor children due to ethical concerns and low clinical utility. However, parents with pathogenic variants (PVs) in disease-causing genes may be interested in pursuing genetic testing that includes the familial PV for their children. The Pediatric Testing Attitudes Scale (P-TAS) was previously developed to examine high-risk parents' opinions about pediatric BRCA genetic testing for adult-onset breast/ovarian cancer. Here, the psychometric properties of the P-TAS were examined in a new sample of N = 126 parents (M age = 47.2 years) with PVs in a more complete set of cancer risk genes represented on DTC panel tests. The mean score on the P-TAS was 44 out of a maximum score of 60, indicating that a majority of parents generally held favorable opinions about testing their children for adult-onset inherited cancer syndromes. The internal consistency of the full scale was high (α = 0.91). A factor analysis identified two-component scales, labeled Attitudes and Beliefs (α = 0.93) and Decision Making and Communication (α = 0.83). In a multivariable regression model, P-TAS co-factors accounted for 34% of variance in parental opinions, including the frequency of prior family communication about cancer and the likelihood of utilizing DTC genetic testing with children (R2  = 0.34, p < 0.001). Results suggest that the P-TAS remains a reliable measure to assess high-risk parents' opinions about pediatric DTC genetic testing for adult-onset conditions, with promising validity. Applications of the P-TAS include informing genetic counseling practice, pediatric medical care, and policy guidelines surrounding DTC genetic testing.

Summary of the experiences, knowledge, medical management, and family communication of monoallelic MUTYH carriers.

Germline genetic testing for inherited cancer risk is increasingly being performed with multigene panel testing with MUTYH often included on colorectal cancer- and polyposis-focused panels, as well as on broader pan-cancer panels. With up to 1%-2% of the general population being monoallelic MUTYH carriers, pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in MUTYH are one of the most common findings on multigene cancer panels. However, little is known about patient experience and understanding of monoallelic MUTYH P/LP variants, nor whether such findings influence medical management recommendations and familial communication, which this study aims to better understand. Monoallelic P/LP MUTYH carriers were recruited from the Prospective Registry of Multiplex Testing (PROMPT) and completed a cross-sectional self-report survey on sociodemographic characteristics, medical and family history, experiences with MUTYH genetic testing, genetics and MUTYH knowledge, perceived cancer risk, and familial communication. Of 115 eligible PROMPT participants, 49 (43%) completed the survey who were primarily female (94%), white (96%), had a history of cancer (61%), and a median age of 51.4 years. Most participants (61%) reported satisfaction with how their healthcare provider managed their genetic test result and care, and 65% of survey participants reported their provider recommended colonoscopy based on their genetic test results. Participants' responses also reflected variable levels of knowledge regarding cancer risks and screening recommendations for MUTYH carriers. The majority (98%) of participants shared their genetic test results with at least some of their relatives; however, only 13% of eligible relatives reportedly underwent cascade testing. Taken together, this study provides needed insight into the overall experiences of monoallelic MUTYH carriers and highlights numerous areas for improvement in clinician education, communication, and management of these individuals.

Increasing Skin Cancer Prevention in Young Adults: the Cumulative Impact of Personalized UV Photography and MC1R Genetic Testing.

Skin cancer has become increasingly common among young adults; however, this population does not consistently adhere to recommended methods for preventing the disease. Interventions in college settings have relied on appearance-focused appeals and have not been able to examine the cumulative effect of multiple behavior change and skin cancer risk communication strategies. The goal of the current study was to examine the unique and combined impacts of personalized ultraviolet (UV) radiation photographs, genetic testing for skin cancer risk, and general skin cancer prevention education. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: (1) skin cancer prevention education, (2) education + UV photo, (3) education + genetic testing, and (4) education + UV photo + genetic testing. Self-reported sun protection, tanning, and sunburn were assessed at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and 1 month post-intervention. The findings indicated benefits of the interventions to skin cancer prevention behaviors in the overall sample; however, the combined (UV photo + genetic testing) intervention had the most consistent positive effects on behaviors. Intervention effects were distinct across seasons. These results suggest that interventions containing multiple skin cancer risk communication strategies hold promise in benefitting health-promoting behavior changes in an at-risk, young adult population.Trial Registration Number: NCT03979872; Registered 6/5/2019.

Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants.

BACKGROUND: Germline risk assessment is increasing as part of cancer care; however, disparities in subsequent genetic counseling are unknown. METHODS: Pan-cancer patients were prospectively consented to tumor-normal sequencing via custom next generation sequencing panel (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets) inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes from January 2015 through December 2019 (97.5% research nonbillable) with protocol for genetics referral. Rates of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs) and downstream counseling were compared across ancestry groups (mutually exclusive groups based on self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish [AJ] heritage) using nonparametric tests and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 15,775 patients (59.6%, non-Hispanic [NH]-White; 15.7%, AJ; 20.5%, non-White [6.9%, Asian; 6.8%, Black/African American (AA); 6.7%, Hispanic; 0.1%, Other], and 4.2%, unknown), 2663 (17%) had a PV. Non-White patients had a lower PV rate (n = 433, 13.4%) compared to NH-Whites (n = 1451, 15.4%) and AJ patients (n = 683, 27.6%), p < .01, with differences in mostly moderate and low/recessive/uncertain penetrance variants. Among 2239 patients with new PV, 1652 (73.8%) completed recommended genetic counseling. Non-White patients had lower rates of genetic counseling (67.7%) than NH-White (73.7%) and AJ patients (78.8%), p < .01, with lower rates occurring in Black/AA (63%) compared to NH-White patients, even after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.97; p = .036). Non-White, particularly Black/AA and Asian, probands had a trend toward lower rates and numbers of at-risk family members being seen for counseling/genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite minimizing barriers to genetic testing, non-White patients were less likely to receive recommended cancer genetics follow-up, with potential implications for oncologic care, cancer risk reduction, and at-risk family members. LAY SUMMARY: Genetic testing is becoming an important part of cancer care, and we wanted to see if genetics care was different between individuals of different backgrounds. We studied 15,775 diverse patients with cancer who had genetic testing using a test called MSK-IMPACT that was covered by research funding. Clinically important genetic findings were high in all groups. However, Black patients were less likely to get recommended counseling compared to White patients. Even after removing many roadblocks, non-White and especially Black patients were less likely to get recommended genetics care, which may affect their cancer treatments and families.

Perspectives of diverse Spanish- and English-speaking patients on the clinical use of polygenic risk scores.

PURPOSE: As polygenic risk scores (PRS) emerge as promising tools to inform clinical care, there is a pressing need for patient-centered evidence to guide their implementation, particularly in diverse populations. Here, we conducted in-depth interviews of diverse Spanish- and English-speaking patients to explore their perspectives on clinical PRS. METHODS: We enrolled 30 biobank participants aged 35-50 years through a purposive sampling strategy, ensuring that >75% self-reported as African/African American or Hispanic/Latinx and half were Spanish-speaking. Semistructured interviews in Spanish or English explored attitudes toward PRS, barriers to adoption, and communication preferences. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Perceived utility of clinical PRS focused on the potential for personal health benefits, and most participants stated that high-risk results would prompt physician consultations and health behavior changes. There was little concern among participants about the limited predictive power of PRS for non-European populations. Barriers to uptake of PRS testing and adoption of PRS-related recommendations included socioeconomic factors, insurance status, race, ethnicity, language, and inadequate understanding of PRS. Participants favored in-person PRS result disclosure by their physician. CONCLUSION: Findings provide valuable insight into diverse patients' attitudes and potential barriers related to clinical PRS, guiding future research and patient-centered clinical implementation.

Targeted BRCA1/2 population screening among Ashkenazi Jewish individuals using a web-enabled medical model: An observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate uptake and follow-up using internet-assisted population genetic testing (GT) for BRCA1/2 Ashkenazi Jewish founder pathogenic variants (AJPVs). METHODS: Across 4 cities in the United States, from December 2017 to March 2020, individuals aged ≥25 years with ≥1 Ashkenazi Jewish grandparent were offered enrollment. Participants consented and enrolled online with chatbot and video education, underwent BRCA1/2 AJPV GT, and chose to receive results from their primary care provider (PCP) or study staff. Surveys were conducted at baseline, at 12 weeks, and annually for 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 5193 participants enrolled and 4109 (79.1%) were tested (median age = 54, female = 77.1%). Upon enrollment, 35.1% of participants selected a PCP to disclose results, and 40.5% of PCPs agreed. Of those tested, 138 (3.4%) were AJPV heterozygotes of whom 21 (15.2%) had no significant family history of cancer, whereas 86 (62.3%) had a known familial pathogenic variant. At 12 weeks, 85.5% of participants with AJPVs planned increased cancer screening; only 3.7% with negative results and a significant family history reported further testing. CONCLUSION: Although continued follow-up is needed, internet-enabled outreach can expand access to targeted GT using a medical model. Observed challenges for population genetic screening efforts include recruitment barriers, improving PCP engagement, and increasing uptake of additional testing when indicated.

Challenges and Opportunities in Engaging Primary Care Providers in BRCA Testing: Results from the BFOR Study.

PURPOSE: Engaging primary care providers (PCPs) in BRCA1/2 testing and results disclosure would increase testing access. The BRCA Founder OutReach (BFOR) study is a prospective study of BRCA1/2 founder mutation screening among individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish descent that sought to involve participants' PCPs in results disclosure. We used quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate PCPs' perspectives, knowledge, and experience disclosing results in BFOR. METHODS: Among PCPs nominated by BFOR participants to disclose BRCA1/2 results, we assessed the proportion agreeing to disclose. To examine PCP's perspectives, knowledge, and willingness to disclose results, we surveyed 501 nominated PCPs. To examine PCPs' experiences disclosing results in BFOR, we surveyed 101 PCPs and conducted 10 semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: In the BFOR study overall, PCPs agreed to disclose their patient's results 40.5% of the time. Two hundred thirty-four PCPs (46.7%) responded to the initial survey. Responding PCPs were more likely to agree to disclose patients' results than non-responders (57.3% vs. 28.6%, p<0.001). Among all respondents, most felt very (19.7%) or somewhat (39.1%) qualified to share results. Among PCPs declining to disclose, insufficient knowledge was the most common reason. In multivariable logistic regression, feeling qualified was the only variable significantly associated with agreeing to disclose results (OR 6.53, 95% CI 3.31, 12.88). In post-disclosure surveys (response rate=55%), PCPs reported largely positive experiences. Interview findings suggested that although PCPs valued the study-provided educational materials, they desired better integration of results and decision support into workflows. CONCLUSION: Barriers exist to incorporating BRCA1/2 testing into primary care. Most PCPs declined to disclose their patients' BFOR results, although survey respondents were motivated and had positive disclosure experiences. PCP training and integrated decision support could be beneficial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03351803), November 24, 2017.

'I had a bigger cancer risk than I thought ': The experience of receiving personalized risk information as part of a skin cancer prevention intervention in the college setting.

BACKGROUND: Diagnoses of both melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancers are becoming increasingly common among young adults. Interventions in this population are a priority because they do not consistently follow skin cancer prevention recommendations. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the current study was to examine college students' perspectives on and experience with receiving a skin cancer prevention intervention that provided personalized skin cancer risk feedback in the form of an ultraviolet (UV) photograph, the results of genetic testing for common skin cancer risk variants, and/or general skin cancer prevention education. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 38 college students who received a skin cancer prevention intervention. The interview covered students' feelings about their personal skin cancer risk information, the impact of the intervention on their skin cancer risk perceptions, actions or intentions to act with regard to their sun protection practices and feedback for improvement of the intervention content or delivery. RESULTS: Participants reported that different intervention components contributed to increased awareness of their sun protection behaviours, shifts in cognitions about and motivation to implement sun protection strategies and reported changes to their skin cancer prevention strategies. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that college students are interested in and responsive to these types of multicomponent skin cancer preventive interventions. Further, students demonstrate some motivation and intentionality toward changing their skin cancer risk behaviour in the short term. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Participants involved in this study were members of the public (undergraduate students) who were involved in a skin cancer prevention intervention, then participated in semistructured interviews, which provided the data analysed for this study.

Acculturation, Sun Tanning Behavior, and Tanning Attitudes Among Asian College Students in the Northeastern USA.

BACKGROUND: College students participate in high levels of tanning, a skin cancer risk behavior due to ultraviolet radiation exposure, yet little is known about Asian college students' behavior. This study examined the relationship between tanning attitudes, acculturation to the USA (cultural assimilation), and tanning behavior. METHOD: An online survey was used to recruit 211 Asian college students in the northeastern USA (47.4% born outside of the USA) to respond to questions about recent tanning behavior, sun protection strategies, attitudes about tanning, and acculturation to the USA. RESULTS: Attitudes about tanning, particularly desire for a darker skin tone and social norms, along with acculturation to the USA, were predictive of intentional tanning. The sample reported high levels of sun protection, which was associated with low acculturation. CONCLUSION: The significant role of acculturation in this study indicates that it may be a useful factor to include in future tanning intervention studies of relevant populations.

Attitudes toward preimplantation genetic testing and quality of life among individuals with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC) syndrome is an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer predisposition associated with germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in the CDH1 gene. Identifying early stage HDGC is difficult, and prophylactic measures can be effective in preventing incidence. Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) can provide information about CDH1 variant status, HDGC risk, and limit familial transmission of CDH1 variants. To date, however, little is known about the attitudes of individuals with CDH1 variants towards PGT. METHODS: Given that little is known about the reproductive attitudes of individuals with HDGC, we recruited participants with CDH1 variants from a familial gastric cancer registry and administered a cross-sectional survey with open- and closed-ended response items. We assessed attitudes regarding PGT and the effect of HDGC on quality of life. RESULTS: Participants (n = 21) were predominantly partnered (61.9%), had a personal cancer history (71.4%), and had biological children (71.4%). Interest in learning about PGT was high; 66.7% of participants were interested in PGT and 90.5% approved of healthcare providers discussing PGT with individuals with CDH1 variants. Attitudes regarding personal use were varied. Among all participants, 35% would not, 25% were uncertain, and 40% would use PGT. Personal philosophy and preferences for family and reproduction were key factors related to PGT attitudes. HDGC had moderate effects on participants' quality of life, including social relationships, health behaviors, and emotional experiences including worry about cancer risk and guilt regarding familial implications. CONCLUSION: PGT was identified by participants as acceptable for use in a variety of contexts and benefits of reproductive counseling involving PGT may extend beyond CDH1 carriers to family members' reproductive behaviors. Dispositions towards PGT are governed by personal philosophy or belief systems. These findings can help guide providers counseling individuals with CDH1 variants.

Uptake and acceptability of a mainstreaming model of hereditary cancer multigene panel testing among patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To address demands for timely germline information to guide treatments, we evaluated experiences of patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer with a mainstreaming genetic testing model wherein multigene panel testing was ordered by oncologists with standardized pretest patient education, and genetic counselors delivered results and post-test genetic counseling via telephone. METHODS: Among 1,203 eligible patients, we conducted a prospective single-arm study to examine patient uptake and acceptability (via self-report surveys at baseline and three weeks and three months following result return) of this mainstreaming model. RESULTS: Only 10% of eligible patients declined participation. Among 1,054 tested participants, 10% had pathogenic variants (PV), 16% had variants of uncertain significance (VUS), and 74% had no variant identified (NV). Participants reported high initial acceptability, including high satisfaction with their testing decision. Variability over time in several outcomes existed for participants with PV or NV: those with NV experienced a temporary increase in depression (pTime < 0.001; pTime2 < 0.001), and those with PV experienced a small increase in genetic testing distress (p = 0.03). Findings suggested that result type, sex, and cancer type were also associated with outcomes including clinical depression and uncertainty. CONCLUSION: This mainstreaming model may offer a feasible approach for extending access to germline genetic information.

Improving our model of cascade testing for hereditary cancer risk by leveraging patient peer support: a concept report.

Consensus and evidence suggest that cascade testing is critical to achieve the promise of cancer genetic testing. However, barriers to cascade testing include effective family communication of genetic risk information and family members' ability to cope with genetic risk. These barriers are further complicated by the developmental needs of unaffected family members during critical windows for family communication and adaptation. Peer support could address these barriers. We provide two illustrative examples of ongoing BRCA1/2-related clinical trials that apply a peer support model to improve family communication and functioning. Peer support can augment currently available genetic services to facilitate adjustment to and effective use of cancer genetic risk information. Importantly, this scalable approach can address the presence of cancer risk within families across multiple developmental stages. This applies a family-centered perspective that accommodates all potentially at-risk relatives. This peer support model can be further applied to emerging topics in clinical genetics to expand reach and impact.

Sun Exposure, Tanning Behaviors, and Sunburn: Examining Activities Associated With Harmful Ultraviolet Radiation Exposures in College Students.

Understanding the behaviors that lead to sunburn is an important objective toward developing intervention strategies to reduce risk for skin cancers. Our cross-sectional study surveyed 400 college students aged 18 and older at a public state university in the northeastern US in 2018 to assess tanning behaviors, outdoor activities, sun protection, and sunburn over the past year. Sunburn was exceedingly common; over half reported one or more sunburns in the past 12 months. Outdoor intentional and unintentional tanning were also common. Male sex, White race, sun sensitive skin type, and outdoor intentional and unintentional tanning were independently associated with increased odds of sunburn. Water and non-water sports, sunbathing, and vacations were also associated with sunburn. These results indicate that tanning and outdoor activities such as sports are important behaviors on which to focus for sunburn prevention among college students. Understanding the behaviors that are associated with sunburn provides useful opportunities to prevent skin cancer among young people.

Effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER decision aid for the selection of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Genomics ADvISER (www.genomicsadviser.com) decision aid (DA) for selection of secondary findings (SF), compared with genetic counseling alone. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to evaluate whether the Genomics ADvISER is superior to genetic counseling when hypothetically selecting SF. Participants were randomized to use the DA followed by discussion with a genetic counselor, or to genetic counseling alone. Surveys were administered at baseline and post-intervention. Primary outcome was decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, preparation for, and satisfaction with decision-making, anxiety, and length of counseling session. RESULTS: Participants (n = 133) were predominantly White/European (74%), female (90%), and ≥50 years old (60%). Decisional conflict (mean difference 0.05; P = 0.60), preparation for decision-making (0.17; P = 0.95), satisfaction with decision (-2.18; P = 0.06), anxiety (0.72; P = 0.56), and knowledge of sequencing limitations (0.14; P = 0.70) did not significantly differ between groups. However, intervention participants had significantly higher knowledge of SF (0.39; P < 0.001) and sequencing benefits (0.97; P = 0.01), and significantly shorter counseling time (24.40 minutes less; P < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: The Genomics ADvISER did not decrease decisional conflict but reduced counseling time and improved knowledge. This decision aid could serve as an educational tool, reducing in-clinic time and potentially health care costs.

Comparison of up-front cash cards and checks as incentives for participation in a clinician survey: a study within a trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is needed regarding effective incentive strategies to increase clinician survey response rates. Cash cards are increasingly used as survey incentives; they are appealing because of their convenience and because in some cases their value can be reclaimed by investigators if not used. However, their effectiveness in clinician surveys is not known. In this study within the BRCA Founder OutReach (BFOR) study, a clinical trial of population-based BRCA1/2 mutation screening, we compared the use of upfront cash cards requiring email activation versus checks as clinician survey incentives. METHODS: Participants receiving BRCA1/2 testing in the BFOR study could elect to receive their results from their primary care provider (PCP, named by the patient) or from a geneticist associated with the study. In order to understand PCPs' knowledge, attitudes, experiences and willingness to disclose results we mailed paper surveys to the first 501 primary care providers (PCPs) in New York, Boston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia who were nominated by study participants to disclose their BRCA1/2 mutation results obtained through the study. We used alternating assignment stratified by city to assign the first 303 clinicians to receive a $50 up-front incentive as a cash card (N = 155) or check (N = 148). The cash card required PCPs to send an activation email in order to be used. We compared response rates by incentive type, adjusting for PCP characteristics and study site. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, PCPs who received checks were more likely to respond to the survey than those who received cash cards (54.1% versus 41.9%, p = 0.046); this remained true when we adjusted for provider characteristics (OR for checks 1.61, 95% CI 1.01, 2.59). No other clinician characteristics had a statistically significant association with response rates in adjusted analyses. When we included an interaction term for incentive type and city, the favorable impact of checks on response rates was evident only in Los Angeles and Philadelphia. CONCLUSIONS: An up-front cash card incentive requiring email activation may be less effective in eliciting clinician responses than up-front checks. However, the benefit of checks for clinician response rates may depend on clinicians' geographic location. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03351803 ), November 24, 2017.

How are multifactorial beliefs about the role of genetics and behavior in cancer causation associated with cancer risk cognitions and emotions in the US population?

OBJECTIVE: People who believe that cancer has both genetic and behavioral risk factors have more accurate mental models of cancer causation and may be more likely to engage in cancer screening behaviors than people who do not hold such multifactorial causal beliefs. This research explored possible health cognitions and emotions that might produce such differences. METHODS: Using nationally representative cross-sectional data from the US Health Information National Trends Survey (N = 2719), we examined whether endorsing a multifactorial model of cancer causation was associated with perceptions of risk and other cancer-related cognitions and affect. Data were analyzed using linear regression with jackknife variance estimation and procedures to account for the complex survey design and weightings. RESULTS: Bivariate and multivariable analyses indicated that people who endorsed multifactorial beliefs about cancer had higher absolute risk perceptions, lower pessimism about cancer prevention, and higher worry about harm from environmental toxins that could be ingested or that emanate from consumer products (Ps < .05). Bivariate analyses indicated that multifactorial beliefs were also associated with higher feelings of risk, but multivariable analyses suggested that this effect was accounted for by the negative affect associated with reporting a family history of cancer. Multifactorial beliefs were not associated with believing that everything causes cancer or that there are too many cancer recommendations to follow (Ps > .05). CONCLUSION: Holding multifactorial causal beliefs about cancer are associated with a constellation of risk perceptions, health cognitions, and affect that may motivate cancer prevention and detection behavior.