Using polygenic risk modification to improve breast cancer prevention: study protocol for the PRiMo multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Established personal and familial risk factors contribute collectively to a woman's risk of breast or ovarian cancer. Existing clinical services offer genetic testing for pathogenic variants in high-risk genes to investigate these risks but recent information on the role of common genomic variants, in the form of a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS), has provided the potential to further personalise breast and ovarian cancer risk assessment. Data from cohort studies support the potential of an integrated risk assessment to improve targeted risk management but experience of this approach in clinical practice is limited. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The polygenic risk modification trial is an Australian multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial of integrated risk assessment including personal and family risk factors with inclusion of breast and ovarian PRS vs standard care. The study will enrol women, unaffected by cancer, undergoing predictive testing at a familial cancer clinic for a pathogenic variant in a known breast cancer (BC) or ovarian cancer (OC) predisposition gene (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, CHEK2, ATM, RAD51C, RAD51D). Array-based genotyping will be used to generate breast cancer (313 SNP) and ovarian cancer (36 SNP) PRS. A suite of materials has been developed for the trial including an online portal for patient consent and questionnaires, and a clinician education programme to train healthcare providers in the use of integrated risk assessment. Long-term follow-up will evaluate differences in the assessed risk and management advice, patient risk management intentions and adherence, patient-reported experience and outcomes, and the health service implications of personalised risk assessment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and at all participating centres. Study findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, and directly to participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000009819.

Narrative therapy and family therapy in genetic counseling: A scoping review.

Genetic counseling facilitates psychological and social adaptation in clients and families. Two psychotherapeutic approaches, narrative and family therapy foster client adaptation to adverse situations and may enhance the genetic counseling process. This scoping review aimed to describe the applications of narrative therapy and family therapy in genetic counseling, and to document the actual and perceived value of these approaches in a genetic counseling setting. Nine original research articles and six commentary articles met the study inclusion criteria. Original articles reported on positive client attitudes when these approaches were applied to hereditary cancer and Huntington disease settings. Five studies applied either approach in group sessions, where safety was key to positive outcomes, including sharing lived experiences and coping strategies. Balanced utilization of structured and open elements in group sessions maximized a sense of control, while also allowing for opportunity to self-disclose. Narrative therapy interventions were time efficient and were reported to foster connection with others and shape a new adaptive narrative centered around strengths. Family therapy approaches, based on experiential family therapy, the intersystem model, object relations family therapy, and the social ecology model, required a greater time commitment, but promoted disclosure of complex feelings and diffused tension. Family therapy genogram tools were feasible in practice, easy to implement, and effective at identifying communication barriers. Commentary articles highlighted the alignment of both approaches with genetic counseling goals and their potential value in practice. Utilization of psychotherapeutic approaches can improve counselors' ability to shape sessions, enhance insight and optimize efficacy, and flexibility in moving between models can maximize impact. This review highlights the paucity of studies investigating the efficacy of these psychotherapeutic approaches in the genetic counseling context and the need for more outcomes-based research on the utilization of narrative or family therapy in genetic counseling practice.

Australian researcher's perspectives on the Australian industry-led moratorium on genetic tests in life insurance.

Fear of insurance discrimination can inhibit genetic research participation. In 2019, an industry-led partial moratorium on using genetic results in Australian life insurance underwriting was introduced. This mixed-methods study used online surveys (n = 59 participants) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22 participants) to capture researchers' perceptions about the moratorium. 66% (n = 39/59) were aware of the moratorium before the survey. Of researchers returning genetic results, 56% (n = 22/39) reported that insurance implications were mentioned in consent forms, but a minority reported updating consent forms post-moratorium (n = 13/39, 33%). Most researchers reported that concerns regarding life insurers utilizing research results inhibited recruitment (35/59, 59%), and few perceived that the moratorium positively influenced participation (n = 9/39, 23%). These findings were supported by qualitative findings which revealed that genetic discrimination concerns were a major issue for some individuals, though these concerns could be eclipsed by the promise of a diagnosis through research participation. The majority thought a regulatory solution should be permanent (n = 34/51, 67%), have financial limits of at least ≥1,000,000 AUD (37/51, 73%), and involve government oversight/legislation (n = 44/51, 86%). In an era where an increasing number of research studies involve genomics as a primary or secondary objective, it is crucial that we have regulatory solutions to address participants' hesitation.