General practitioners' (GPs) experience, attitudes and needs on clinical genetic services: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The proliferation and growing demands of genetic testing are anticipated to revolutionise medical practice. As gatekeepers of healthcare systems, general practitioners (GPs) are expected to play a critical role in the provision of clinical genetic services. This paper aims to review existing literature on GPs' experience, attitudes and needs towards clinical genetic services. DESIGN: A systematic mixed studies review of papers published between 2010 and 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The inclusion criterion was peer-reviewed articles in English and related to GPs' experience, views and needs on any genetic testing. INFORMATION SOURCES: The PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using Mesh terms, Boolean and wildcards combinations to identify peer-reviewed articles published from 2010 to 2022. Study quality was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Only articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected. A thematic meta-synthesis was conducted on the final sample of selected articles to identify key themes. RESULTS: A total of 62 articles were included in the review. Uncertainty over GPs' role in providing genetic services were attributed by the lack of confidence and time constraints and rarity of cases may further exacerbate their reluctance to shoulder an expanded role in clinical genetics. Although educational interventions were found to increasing GPs' knowledge and confidence to carry out genetic tasks, varied interest on genetic testing and preference for a shared care model with other genetic health professionals have resulted in minimal translation to clinical adoption. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the need for deeper exploration of GPs' varied experience and attitudes towards clinical genetic services to better facilitate targeted intervention in the adoption of clinical genetics.

Experience and Perceptions of a Family Health History Risk Assessment Tool among Multi-Ethnic Asian Breast Cancer Patients.

A family health history-based risk assessment is particularly valuable for guiding cancer screening and treatment strategies, yet an optimal implementation depends upon end-users' values and needs. This is not only true prior to disease development, but also for those already affected. The aim of this study is to explore perceptions of the value of knowing one's family health history (FHH)-based risk, experience using a patient-facing FHH tool and the potential of the tool for wider implementation. Twenty multi-ethnic Asian patients undergoing breast cancer treatment in Singapore completed an FHH-based risk assessment. Semi-structured one-on-one interviews were conducted and data were thematically analyzed. All participants were female and slightly more than half were Chinese. The acceptance and usage of an FHH risk assessment tool for cancers and its broader implementation was affected by a perceived importance of personal control over early detection, patient concerns of anxiety for themselves and their families due to risk results, concerns for genetic discrimination, adequacy of follow-up care plans and Asian cultural beliefs toward disease and dying. This study uniquely sheds light on the factors affecting Asian breast cancer patients' perceptions about undergoing an FHH-based risk assessment, which should inform steps for a broader implementation in Asian healthcare systems.

How practice setting affects family physicians' views on genetic screening: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Genetic screening (GS), defined as the clinical testing of a population to identify asymptomatic individuals with the aim of providing those identified as high risk with prevention, early treatment, or reproductive options. Genetic screening (GS) improves patient outcomes and is accessible to the community. Family physicians (FPs) are ideally placed to offer GS. There is a need for FPs to adopt GS to address anticipated genetic specialist shortages. OBJECTIVE: To explore FP attitudes, perceived roles, motivators and barriers, towards GS; and explore similarities and differences between private and public sector FPs. METHODS: We developed a semi-structured interview guide using existing literature. We interviewed private and public sector FPs recruited by purposive, convenience and snowballing strategies, by telephone or video to theme saturation. All sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded for themes by two independent researchers with an adjudicator. RESULTS: Thirty FPs were interviewed (15 private, 15 public). Theme saturation was reached for each group. A total of 12 themes (6 common, 3 from private-practice participants, 3 public-employed participants) emerged. Six common major themes emerged: personal lack of training and experience, roles and relevance of GS to family medicine, reluctance and resistance to adding GS to practice, FP motivations for adoption, patient factors as barrier, and potential solutions. Three themes (all facilitators) were unique to the private group: strong rapport with patients, high practice autonomy, and high patient literacy. Three themes (all barriers) were unique to the public group: lack of control, patients' lower socioeconomic status, and rigid administrative infrastructure. CONCLUSION: FPs are motivated to incorporate GS but need support for implementation. Policy-makers should consider the practice setting when introducing new screening functions. Strategies to change FP behaviours should be sensitive to their sense of autonomy, and the external factors (either as facilitators or as barriers) shaping FP practices in a given clinical setting.

Clinical implementation of an oncology-specific family health history risk assessment tool.

BACKGROUND: The presence of hereditary cancer syndromes in cancer patients can have an impact on current clinical care and post-treatment prevention and surveillance measures. Several barriers inhibit identification of hereditary cancer syndromes in routine practice. This paper describes the impact of using a patient-facing family health history risk assessment platform on the identification and referral of breast cancer patients to genetic counselling services. METHODS: This was a hybrid implementation-effectiveness study completed in breast cancer clinics. English-literate patients not previously referred for genetic counselling and/or gone through genetic testing were offered enrollment. Consented participants were provided educational materials on family health history collection, entered their family health history into the platform and completed a satisfaction survey. Upon completion, participants and their clinicians were given personalized risk reports. Chart abstraction was done to identify actions taken by patients, providers and genetic counsellors. RESULTS: Of 195 patients approached, 102 consented and completed the study (mean age 55.7, 100 % women). Sixty-six (65 %) met guideline criteria for genetic counseling of which 24 (36 %) were referred for genetic counseling. Of those referred, 13 (54 %) participants attended and eight (33 %) completed genetic testing. On multivariate logistic regression, referral was not associated with age, cancer stage, or race but was associated with clinical provider (p = 0.041). Most providers (71 %) had higher referral rates during the study compared to prior. The majority of participants found the experience useful (84 %), were more aware of their health risks (83 %), and were likely to recommend using a patient-facing platform to others (69 %). CONCLUSIONS: 65 % of patients attending breast cancer clinics in this study are at-risk for hereditary conditions based on current guidelines. Using a patient-facing risk assessment platform enhances the ability to identify these patients systematically and with widespread acceptability and recognized value by patients. As only a third of at-risk participants received referrals for genetic counseling, further understanding barriers to referral is needed to optimize hereditary risk assessment in oncology practices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIH Clinical Trials registry, NCT04639934 . Registered Nov 23, 2020 -- Retrospectively registered.

Managing cancer in context of pandemic: a qualitative study to explore the emotional and behavioural responses of patients with cancer and their caregivers to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Having to access life-sustaining treatment during the emerging COVID-19 outbreak has placed patients with cancer at an especially vulnerable position notwithstanding their immunocompromised condition. The present study aimed to elucidate cancer patients' and their caregivers' experiences during this outbreak. DESIGN: Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted. SETTING: A tertiary cancer care facility. PARTICIPANTS: 16 patients with cancer and 14 caregivers. Inclusions criteria were: (A) diagnosed with cancer, (B) receiving active treatment or follow-ups, (C) aged 21 years and above and (D) fluent in English or Mandarin. RESULTS: Thematic analysis was conducted. Five themes were identified: heightened sense of threat, impact on healthcare experience, responsibility falls on oneself, striving for normalcy and sense of safety and trust. Heightened threat of COVID-19 was more pronounced in patients and linked to vulnerability and fear, uncertainty and actions of socially irresponsible others. Dominant in their healthcare experience was prioritising cancer and treatment amidst heightened threat and anticipatory worry about treatment disruptions. Both noted on the importance of taking responsibility for one's health, with caregivers reporting a reinforced sense of duty towards patients. They strived to maintain normalcy by viewing COVID-19 as beyond personal control, downplaying and living life as usual. Their resolve was supported by a sense of safety from the actions of authorities, hospitals and trust towards healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer intensifies threat and the emotional impact of COVID-19 and may trigger specific concerns related to treatment. Psychoeducation interventions led by healthcare providers over digital platforms could help address cancer-specific concerns and support patients and caregivers during the pandemic.

An in-depth exploration of the post-test informational needs of BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers in Asia.

INTRODUCTION: Identification of one's status as a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carrier often marks the start of navigating challenging decisions related to cancer risk management and result disclosure. Carriers report unmet informational needs, but studies have yet to explore the specific aspects of and how best to fulfill these needs. This study aims to explore the informational needs of BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers in Asia to inform for the design of educational materials to support risk management decision-making. METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with two male and 22 female English-speaking BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers, aged 29-66 years, identified through the Cancer Genetics Service at the National Cancer Centre Singapore. A grounded theory approach with thematic analysis was undertaken to extract dominant themes. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: (i) proactive online information seeking behaviors (ii) personalized informational needs; (iii) challenges in sharing the results; and (iv) lack of genetic awareness. DISCUSSION: Participants highlight challenges with sharing their result arising from significant post-result informational needs, which have manifested into proactive online information-seeking behaviors. They desire for an online source of information, where content is personalized, reliable and local. Participants foresee the potential of an online resource to raise genetic awareness. This suggests the use of a culturally tailored online-based genetics resource, to promote result disclosure, empower risk-management decisions and raise genetic literacy rates. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s13053-020-00154-x.

The Development and Evaluation of a Diet Quality Index for Asian Toddlers and Its Perinatal Correlates: The GUSTO Cohort Study.

Early childhood diet may have lifelong influences on health outcomes, yet development of indices to assess diet quality is scarce in toddlers, especially in Asian countries. We aimed to develop and evaluate a Diet Quality Index (DQI) in a multi-ethnic Asian mother⁻offspring cohort and identify perinatal correlates of early childhood diet. Based primarily on the Singapore dietary guidelines, the DQI includes seven food components: rice, bread and alternatives; fruit; vegetables; meat and alternatives; milk and dairy products; whole grains; and foods high in sugar. The DQI was developed using parental report of Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ) data for 18-month-old toddlers (n = 561). The mean ± SD of DQI for the study toddlers was 44.2 ± 8.9 (theoretical range: 0⁻65). A higher DQI (better diet quality) was associated with higher intakes of several nutrients and food groups (e.g., vegetables, dietary fibre, and beta-carotene; all p < 0.001). Further construct validity was demonstrated by substantial agreement between the FFQ-DQI and 24-hour-recall-DQI (Intraclass-correlation-coefficient: 0.70). Independent predictors of lower DQI included higher maternal pre-pregnancy BMI [ß(95% CI): -0.23(-0.39, -0.07)], Malay ethnicity [-1.88(-3.67, -0.09)], lower household income [-1.97(-3.91, -0.03)], lower education level [-2.57(-4.85, -0.28)] and never breastfeeding [-6.17(-11.06, -1.28)]. We developed a valid DQI for assessing the overall quality of the diets of Asian toddlers.

Performance of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: SNP risk information can potentially improve the accuracy of breast cancer risk prediction. We aim to review and assess the performance of SNP-enhanced risk prediction models. METHODS: Studies that reported area under the ROC curve (AUC) and/or net reclassification improvement (NRI) for both traditional and SNP-enhanced risk models were identified. Meta-analyses were conducted to compare across all models and within similar baseline risk models. RESULTS: Twenty-six of 406 studies were included. Pooled estimate of AUC improvement is 0.044 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.038-0.049] for all 38 models, while estimates by baseline models ranged from 0.033 (95% CI, 0.025-0.041) for BCRAT to 0.053 (95% CI, 0.018-0.087) for partial BCRAT. There was no observable trend between AUC improvement and number of SNPs. One study found that the NRI was significantly larger when only intermediate-risk women were included. Two other studies showed that majority of the risk reclassification occurred in intermediate-risk women. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of SNP risk information may be more beneficial for women with intermediate risk. IMPACT: Screening could be a two-step process where a questionnaire is first used to identify intermediate-risk individuals, followed by SNP testing for these women only.