Genetic Counseling Assistants: an Integral Piece of the Evolving Genetic Counseling Service Delivery Model.

This study explores the potential impact of the genetic counseling assistant (GCA) position on the efficiency of the genetic counseling field, evaluates attitudes regarding expansion of the genetic counseling field to include the GCA, and presents data on GCA endeavors and GCA job tasks as reported by GCAs, certified genetic counselors (CGCs), and program directors (PDs). Data on GCA roles and attitudes toward different aspects of the GCA position were collected via surveys of CGCs who have worked with GCAs, PDs who have and have not had experience with GCAs in their programs, and GCAs. We analyzed responses from 63 individuals: 27 PDs, 22 CGCs, and 14 GCAs. GCAs' impact on efficiency was calculated via internal analysis of genetic patient volume per genetic counselor within the University of Texas Southwestern (UTSW) patient database prior to, and since the addition of, a GCA to the practice. The response rates for PDs, CGCs, and GCAs were 27 %, 79 %, and 61 %, respectively. Every CGC stated the GCA increased their efficiency. CGCs with a GCA reported a 60 % average increase in patient volume. This figure was congruent with internal data from the UTSW cancer genetics program (58.5 % increase). Appropriate responsibilities for GCAs as reported by CGCs and PDs (>90 %) include: data entry, shipping tests, administrative tasks, research, and ordering supplies. Regarding GCAs delivering test results, there was response variation whether this should be a job duty: 42 % of CGCs agreed to GCAs delivering negative results to patients, compared to 22 % of program directors. Twenty-two percent of PDs expressed concern about the job title "Genetic Counseling Assistant." Ninety percent of CGCs felt that GCA was a career path to becoming a CGC, compared to 42 % of PDs. Eighty-three percent of GCAs who decided to apply to CGC graduate programs were accepted. We conclude the addition of a GCA to a genetic counseling practice contributes to increased efficiency and is one way to expand the reach of the profession.

An internal performance assessment of CancerGene Connect: an electronic tool to streamline, measure and improve the genetic counseling process.

CancerGene Connect (CGC) is a web-based program that combines the collection of family and medical history, cancer risk assessment, psychosocial assessment, report templates, a result tracking system, and a patient follow up system. The performance of CGC was assessed in several ways: pre-appointment completion data analyzed for demographic and health variables; a time study to assess overall time per case and to compare the data entry by the genetic counselor compared to the patient, and a measured quality assessment of the program via observation and interview of patients. Prior to their appointment, 52.3% of 2,414 patients completed the online patient questionnaire section of CGC. There were significant differences in completion rates among racial and ethnic groups. County hospital patients were less likely to complete the questionnaire than insured patients (p < 0.0001); and likewise uninsured patients and patients with Medicare/Medicaid were less likely to complete the questionnaire than private patients (p < 0.0001). The average genetic counseling time per case was 82 min, with no significant differences whether the counselor or the patient completed CGC. CGC reduces genetic counselor time by approximately 14-46% compared to average time per case using traditional risk assessment and documentation methods previously reported. All surveyed users felt the questionnaire was easy to understand. CGC is an effective tool that streamlines workflow, and provides a standardized data collection tool that can be used to evaluate and improve the genetic counseling process.

Prediction of Cancer Prevention: From Mammogram Screening to Identification of BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers in Underserved Populations.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventative Service Task Force recommends that physicians perform a genetic risk assessment to identify women at risk for BRCA1/2 mutations associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome. However, outcomes data after a diagnosis of HBOC syndrome especially in diverse populations, are minimal. Here we asked if genetic screening of high-risk underserved women identified in the mammogram population reduces cancer incidence. METHODS: We evaluated 61,924 underserved women at screening mammography for family histories suggestive of HBOC syndrome over the course of 21 months. Data were collected retrospectively from patients at two safety net hospitals through chart review. A computer model was used to calculate the long-term effect of this screening on cancer incidence by assessing both the mutation detection rate and the completion of prophylactic surgeries in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. FINDINGS: We identified 20 of the 85 (23.5%) expected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in the underserved population. The frequencies of prophylactic mastectomies and oophorectomies in the mutation carriers were 25% and 40%, respectively. Using these data, our model predicted only an 8.8% reduction in both breast and ovarian cancer in the underserved patients. This contrasts with a 57% reduction in breast cancer and 51% reduction in ovarian cancer in an insured reference population. Our data indicate that underserved patients with HBOC syndrome are difficult to identify and when identified are limited in their ability to adhere to NCCN guidelines for cancer prevention. INTERPRETATION: Screening for women at risk for HBOC syndrome in mammogram populations will only prevent cancers if we can increase compliance with management guidelines. This study provides prototypic baseline data for step-wise analysis of the efficacy of the use of family history analysis in the mammography setting for detection and management of HBOC syndrome.

Use of Whole Genome Sequencing for Diagnosis and Discovery in the Cancer Genetics Clinic.

Despite the potential of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to improve patient diagnosis and care, the empirical value of WGS in the cancer genetics clinic is unknown. We performed WGS on members of two cohorts of cancer genetics patients: those with BRCA1/2 mutations (n = 176) and those without (n = 82). Initial analysis of potentially pathogenic variants (PPVs, defined as nonsynonymous variants with allele frequency < 1% in ESP6500) in 163 clinically-relevant genes suggested that WGS will provide useful clinical results. This is despite the fact that a majority of PPVs were novel missense variants likely to be classified as variants of unknown significance (VUS). Furthermore, previously reported pathogenic missense variants did not always associate with their predicted diseases in our patients. This suggests that the clinical use of WGS will require large-scale efforts to consolidate WGS and patient data to improve accuracy of interpretation of rare variants. While loss-of-function (LoF) variants represented only a small fraction of PPVs, WGS identified additional cancer risk LoF PPVs in patients with known BRCA1/2 mutations and led to cancer risk diagnoses in 21% of non-BRCA cancer genetics patients after expanding our analysis to 3209 ClinVar genes. These data illustrate how WGS can be used to improve our ability to discover patients' cancer genetic risks.