State of the Science of Scale-Up of Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Cancer deaths in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) will nearly double by 2040. Available evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer prevention and early detection can reduce cancer-related mortality, yet there is a lack of evidence on effectively scaling these EBIs in LMIC settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to identify published literature from six databases between 2012 and 2022 that described efforts for scaling cancer prevention and early detection EBIs in LMICs. Included studies met one of two definitions of scale-up: (1) deliberate efforts to increase the impact of effective intervention to benefit more people or (2) an intervention shown to be efficacious on a small scale expanded under real-world conditions to reach a greater proportion of eligible population. Study characteristics, including EBIs, implementation strategies, and outcomes used, were summarized using frameworks from the field of implementation science. RESULTS: This search yielded 3,076 abstracts, with 24 studies eligible for inclusion. Included studies focused on a number of cancer sites including cervical (67%), breast (13%), breast and cervical (13%), liver (4%), and colon (4%). Commonly reported scale-up strategies included developing stakeholder inter-relationships, training and education, and changing infrastructure. Barriers to scale-up were reported at individual, health facility, and community levels. Few studies reported applying conceptual frameworks to guide strategy selection and evaluation. CONCLUSION: Although there were relatively few published reports, this scoping review offers insight into the approaches used by LMICs to scale up cancer EBIs, including common strategies and barriers. More importantly, it illustrates the urgent need to fill gaps in research to guide best practices for bringing the implementation of cancer EBIs to scale in LMICs.

Role of sex in lung cancer risk prediction based on single low-dose chest computed tomography.

A validated open-source deep-learning algorithm called Sybil can accurately predict long-term lung cancer risk from a single low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT). However, Sybil was trained on a majority-male cohort. Use of artificial intelligence algorithms trained on imbalanced cohorts may lead to inequitable outcomes in real-world settings. We aimed to study whether Sybil predicts lung cancer risk equally regardless of sex. We analyzed 10,573 LDCTs from 6127 consecutive lung cancer screening participants across a health system between 2015 and 2021. Sybil achieved AUCs of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93) for females and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.94) for males at 1 year, p = 0.92. At 6 years, the AUC was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83-0.93) for females and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.72-0.86) for males, p = 0.01. In conclusion, Sybil can accurately predict future lung cancer risk in females and males in a real-world setting and performs better in females than in males for predicting 6-year lung cancer risk.

Inequities in referrals to a breast cancer risk assessment and prevention clinic: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Inequitable access to personalized breast cancer screening and prevention may compound racial and ethnic disparities in outcomes. The Breast Cancer Personalized Risk Assessment, Education and Prevention (B-PREP) program, located within the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) Comprehensive Breast Health Center (BHC), provides care to patients at high risk for developing breast cancer. We sought to characterize the differences between BWH primary care patients referred specifically to B-PREP for risk evaluation and those referred to the BHC for benign breast conditions. Through interviews with primary care clinicians, we sought to explore contributors to potentially inequitable B-PREP referral patterns. METHODS: We used electronic health record data and the B-PREP clinical database to identify patients referred by primary care clinicians to the BHC or B-PREP between 2017 and 2020. We examined associations with likelihood of referral to B-PREP for risk assessment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine primary care clinicians from six clinics to explore referral patterns. RESULTS: Of 1789 patients, 78.0% were referred for benign breast conditions, and 21.5% for risk assessment. In multivariable analyses, Black individuals were less likely to be referred for risk than for benign conditions (OR 0.38, 95% CI:0.23-0.63) as were those with Medicaid/Medicare (OR 0.72, 95% CI:0.53-0.98; OR 0.52, 95% CI:0.27-0.99) and those whose preferred language was not English (OR 0.26, 95% CI:0.12-0.57). Interviewed clinicians described inconsistent approaches to risk assessment and variable B-PREP awareness. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-site evaluation, among individuals referred by primary care clinicians for specialized breast care, Black, publicly-insured patients, and those whose preferred language was not English were less likely to be referred for risk assessment. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings. Interventions to standardize breast cancer risk assessment in primary care may improve equity.

Patients' experiences undergoing breast evaluation in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program.

PURPOSE: There is urgent need for interventions to facilitate earlier diagnosis of breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries where mammography screening is not widely available. Understanding patients' experiences with early detection efforts, whether they are ultimately diagnosed with cancer or benign disease, is critical to optimize interventions and maximize community engagement. We sought to understand the experiences of patients undergoing breast evaluation in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program (WCEDP). METHODS: We conducted in-person semi-structured interviews with 30 patients in two districts of Rwanda participating in the WCEDP. Patients represented a range of ages and both benign and malignant diagnoses. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, translated, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Participants identified facilitators and barriers of timely care along the breast evaluation pathway. Community awareness initiatives were facilitators to care-seeking, while persistent myths and stigma about cancer were barriers. Participants valued clear clinician-patient communication and emotional support from clinicians and peers. Poverty was a major barrier for participants who described difficulty paying for transport, insurance premiums, and other direct and indirect costs of hospital referrals in particular. COVID-19 lockdowns caused delays for referred patients. Although false-positive clinical breast exams conferred financial and emotional burdens, participants nonetheless voiced appreciation for their experience and felt empowered to monitor their own breast health and share knowledge with others. CONCLUSION: Rwandan women experienced both benefits and burdens as they underwent breast evaluation. Enthusiasm for participation was not reduced by the experience of a false-positive result. Reducing financial, logistical and emotional burdens of the breast diagnostic pathway through patient navigation, peer support and decentralization of diagnostic services could improve patients' experience.

Implementation research: including breast examinations in a cervical cancer screening programme, Rwanda.

Objective: To evaluate whether integrating breast and cervical cancer screening in Rwanda's Women's Cancer Early Detection Program led to early breast cancer diagnoses in asymptomatic women. Methods: Launched in three districts in 2018-2019, the early detection programme offered clinical breast examination screening for all women receiving cervical cancer screening, and diagnostic breast examination for women with breast cancer symptoms. Women with abnormal breast examinations were referred to district hospitals and then to referral hospitals if needed. We examined how often clinics were held, patient volumes and number of referrals. We also examined intervals between referrals and visits to the next care level and, among women diagnosed with cancer, their initial reasons for seeking care. Findings: Health centres held clinics > 68% of the weeks. Overall, 9763 women received cervical cancer screening and clinical breast examination and 7616 received breast examination alone. Of 585 women referred from health centres, 436 (74.5%) visited the district hospital after a median of 9 days (interquartile range, IQR: 3-19). Of 200 women referred to referral hospitals, 179 (89.5%) attended after a median of 11 days (IQR: 4-18). Of 29 women diagnosed with breast cancer, 19 were ≥ 50 years and 23 had stage III or stage IV disease. All women with breast cancer whose reasons for seeking care were known (23 women) had experienced breast cancer symptoms. Conclusion: In the short-term, integrating clinical breast examination with cervical cancer screening was not associated with detection of early-stage breast cancer among asymptomatic women. Priority should be given to encouraging women to seek timely care for symptoms.

Cascade Analysis for Women Presenting With Breast Concerns to a Zonal Hospital in Mwanza, Tanzania.

PURPOSE: In Tanzania, high breast cancer mortality can be attributed to delays in diagnosis and treatment initiation. We adapted the cascade analysis method to depict sequential steps along the breast cancer care pathway in a tertiary hospital in Mwanza, to identify where correction of loss to attrition would have the biggest impact on improving outcomes. METHODS: This prospective cohort included adult women presenting with breast concerns between February 2020 and January 2022. Five cascade steps beginning with patients' initial clinical breast assessment (CBA) through cancer treatment were identified: (1) CBA, (2) ordering diagnostic test(s), (3) completion of diagnostic test(s), (4) receipt of final diagnosis, and (5) initiating cancer treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 721 eligible women with a median age of 42.8 years (IQR, 32.5-55.0) were included. Median time from presentation to treatment initiation was 35 days (IQR, 20-63). For step 1, 39.1% (n = 282) of patients were diagnosed with a benign concern and removed from the cascade. Completion rates for steps 2-4 were 95.0%, 90.2%, and 91.0, respectively. There were 156 (45.6%) patients diagnosed with breast cancer, and for step 5, 71.2% of patients initiated cancer treatment. In steps 2, 3, 4, and 5, there was a loss of 22, 41, 34, and 45 patients, respectively. If loss was eliminated at steps 2, 3, 4, or 5, an additional 6, 12, 11, or 45 patients, respectively, would have completed the pathway. CONCLUSION: Initiating cancer treatment was identified as the step with the biggest loss and, if remedied, would have the biggest impact on improving breast cancer outcomes at Bugando Medical Centre. These results will inform future programs focused on reducing overall loss in the system and supporting patients with breast cancer.

Screening MRI Does Not Increase Cancer Detection or Result in an Earlier Stage at Diagnosis for Patients with High-Risk Breast Lesions: A Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend consideration of screening MRI for patients with high-risk breast lesions (HRLs), acknowledging limited data for this moderate-risk population. METHODS: This study identified patients with atypical ductal/lobular hyperplasia (ADH/ALH), lobular carcinoma in situ, (LCIS) or both evaluated at our high-risk clinic. Patients were categorized as having received screening mammography (MMG) alone vs. MMG and breast MRI (MMG+MRI). Inverse probability weighting based on propensity scores (PS) representing likelihood of MRI use was applied to Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses to determine cancer detection and biopsy rates by screening group. RESULTS: Among 908 eligible patients, 699 (77%) patients with available follow-up data were analyzed (542 with ADH/ALH and 157 with LCIS). Of the 699 patients, 540 (77%) received MMG alone, and 159 (23%) received MMG + MRI. The median follow-up period was 25 months, during which a median of two MRIs were performed. After PS-weighting, the characteristics of each screening group were well-balanced with respect to age, race, body mass index (BMI), menopausal status, breast density, family history, HRL type, and chemoprevention use. The 4 year breast cancer detection rate was 3.6% with both MMG alone and MMG+MRI (p = 0.89). The breast biopsy rates were significantly higher with MMG+MRI (30.5% vs12.6%; hazard ratio [HR], 2.67; p < 0.001). All breast cancers were clinically node-negative and pathologic stage 0 or 1. Among five cancers in the MMG+MRI group, two were MRI-detected, two were MMG-detected, and one was detected on clinical exam. CONCLUSIONS: Screening MRI did not improve cancer detection, and cancer characteristics were favorable whether screened with MMG alone or MMG + MRI. These findings question the benefit of MRI for patients with HRL, although longer-term follow-up study is needed.

Integrating Breast Cancer Early Detection Into a Resource-Constrained Primary Health Care System: Health Care Workers' Experiences in Rwanda.

PURPOSE: There is limited evidence to guide incorporation of breast cancer early detection into resource-constrained health systems where mammography screening is not yet available. To inform such strategies, we sought to understand health care workers' perspectives on a breast cancer early detection initiative integrated into community, primary, and secondary levels of care in Rwanda. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with 33 community health workers, clinicians, and administrators at health facilities participating in the Women's Cancer Early Detection Program (WCEDP), through which women received clinical breast examination if they were receiving cervical cancer screening, or had breast concerns. Through thematic analysis, we identified dynamics and patterns associated with successes and challenges of the program's breast health services. RESULTS: Successes and challenges identified by participants corresponded with the community- and primary care-based steps of cancer early diagnosis identified by the WHO. Regarding step 1 (community awareness/access), participants noted increases in awareness and care-seeking. Challenges included difficulty overcoming stigma and engaging older women. Regarding step 2 (clinical evaluation), all participants described increased breast health knowledge, skills, and confidence. Integrating the WCEDP with other services was challenging because of inadequate staffing; offering WCEDP services on a designated day/week had advantages and disadvantages. Although participants appreciated WCEDP referral mechanisms, they desired more communication from referral facilities. Patients' poverty was the most consistently identified impediment to referral completion. CONCLUSION: Rwandan health care workers identified real-world successes and challenges of implementing principles of early cancer diagnosis for breast cancer early detection. Future interventions should focus on engagement of older women, community awareness, patient socioeconomic support, and optimizing integration into primary care.

Clinical Diagnoses and Outcomes After Diagnostic Breast Ultrasound by Nurses and General Practitioner Physicians in Rural Rwanda.

PURPOSE: To scale up early detection of breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries, research is needed to inform the role of diagnostic breast ultrasound performed by nonradiologists in resource-constrained settings. The authors examined 2-year clinical follow-up and outcomes among women who underwent diagnostic breast ultrasound performed by nonradiologist clinicians participating in a breast ultrasound training and mentorship program at a rural Rwandan hospital. METHODS: Imaging findings, management plans, and pathologic results were prospectively collected during the training using a standardized form. Data on follow-up and outcomes for patients receiving breast ultrasound between January 2016 and March 2017 were retrospectively collected through medical record review. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-nine breast palpable findings (199 patients) met the study's eligibility criteria. Of 104 lesions initially biopsied, 38 were malignant on initial biopsy; 3 lesions were identified as malignant on repeat biopsy. All 34 patients ultimately diagnosed with cancer received initial recommendations for either biopsy or aspiration by trainees. The positive predictive value of trainee biopsy recommendation was 34.8% (95% confidence interval, 24.8%-45.0%). The sensitivity of trainees' biopsy recommendation for identifying malignant lesions was 92.7% (95% confidence interval, 84.2%-100%). Of 46 patients who did not receive biopsy and were told to return for clinical or imaging follow-up, 37.0% did not return. CONCLUSIONS: Trained nonradiologist clinicians in Rwanda successfully identified suspicious breast lesions on diagnostic breast ultrasound. Loss to follow-up was common among patients instructed to return for surveillance, so lower biopsy thresholds, decentralized surveillance, or patient navigation should be considered for patients with low- or intermediate-suspicion lesions.

Health system costs of a breast cancer early diagnosis programme in a rural district of Rwanda: a retrospective, cross-sectional economic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to quantify the health system cost of the first 2 years of a Breast Cancer Early Detection (BCED) programme in a rural district in Rwanda. We also aimed to estimate the cost of implementing the programme in other districts with different referral pathways and identify opportunities for enhanced cost efficiency. DESIGN: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis using time-driven activity-based costing, based on timed patient clinical encounters, retrospective patient data and unit costs of resources abstracted from administrative and finance records. SETTING: The BCED programme focused on timely evaluation of individuals with breast symptoms. The study evaluated the health system cost of the BCED programme at seven health centres (HCs) in Burera district and Butaro Cancer Centre of Excellence (BCCOE) at Butaro District Hospital. OUTCOME MEASURES: Health system costs per patient visit and cost per cancer diagnosed were quantified. Total start-up and recurring operational costs were also estimated, as well as health system costs of different scale-up adaptations in other districts. RESULTS: One-time start-up costswere US$36 917, recurring operational costswere US$67 711 and clinical costswere US$14 824 over 2 years. Clinical breast examinations (CBE) at HCs cost US$3.27/visit. At BCCOE, CBE-only visits cost US$13.47/visit, CBE/ultrasound US$14.79/visit and CBE/ultrasound/biopsy/pathology US$147.81/visit. Overall, clinical cost per breast cancer diagnosed was US$1482. Clinicalcost drivers were personnel at HCs (55%) and biopsy/pathology supplies at BCCOE (46%). In other districts, patients experience a longer breast evaluation pathway, adding about US$14.00/patient; this could be decreased if ultrasound services were decentralised. CONCLUSION: Clinical costs associated with BCED services at HCs were modest, similar to other general outpatient services. The BCED programme's start-up and operational costs were high but could be reduced by using local trainers and virtual mentorship. In other districts, decentralising ultrasound and/or biopsies to district hospitals could reduce costs.

Initiation and tolerance of chemoprevention among women with high-risk breast lesions: the potential of low-dose tamoxifen.

PURPOSE: High-risk lesions (HRLs) of the breast are an indication for chemoprevention, yet uptake is low, largely due to concerns about side effects. In 2019, low-dose (5 mg) tamoxifen was demonstrated to reduce breast cancer risk with improved tolerance. We describe chemoprevention uptake in an academic clinic before and after the introduction of low-dose tamoxifen. METHODS: Females age ≥ 35 with HRLs who established care from April 2017 through January 2020 and eligible for chemoprevention were included. Rates of chemoprevention initiation before and after the introduction of low-dose tamoxifen (pre-2019 vs. post-2019) were compared with chi-squared tests. Logistic regression identified demographic and clinical factors associated with chemoprevention initiation. Kaplan-Meier methods determined the rates of discontinuation. RESULTS: Among 660 eligible females with HRLs, 22.7% initiated chemoprevention. Median time from first visit to chemoprevention initiation was 54 days (interquartile range (IQR): 0-209); 31.0% (46/150) started chemoprevention > 6 months after their initial visit. Chemoprevention uptake was not significantly different pre-2019 vs. post-2019 (21.2% vs. 26.3%, p = 0.16); however, post-2019, low-dose tamoxifen became the most popular option (41.5%, 34/82). On multivariable analyses, age and breast cancer family history were significantly associated with chemoprevention initiation. Discontinuation rates at 1 year were lowest for low-dose tamoxifen (6.7%) vs. tamoxifen 20 mg (15.0%), raloxifene (20.4%), or an aromatase inhibitor (20.0%). CONCLUSION: In this modern cohort, 22.7% of females with HRLs initiated chemoprevention with 31.0% initiating chemoprevention > 6 months after their first visit. Low-dose tamoxifen is now the most popular choice for chemoprevention, with low discontinuation rates at 1 year.

Downstream Mammary and Extramammary Cascade Services and Spending Following Screening Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Mammography Among Commercially Insured Women.

Importance: Increasing use of screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including among women at low or average risk of breast cancer, raises concerns about resulting mammary and extramammary cascades (downstream services and new diagnoses) of uncertain value. Objective: To estimate rates of cascade events (ie, laboratory tests, imaging tests, procedures, visits, hospitalizations, and new diagnoses) and associated spending following screening breast MRI vs mammography among commercially insured US women. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used 2016 to 2018 data from the MarketScan research database (IBM Corporation), which includes claims and administrative data from large US employers and commercial payers. Participants included commercially insured women aged 40 to 64 years without prior breast cancer who received an index bilateral screening breast MRI or mammogram between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018. We used propensity scores based on sociodemographic, clinical, and utilization variables to match MRI recipients to mammogram recipients in each month of index service use. Data were analyzed from October 8, 2020, to October 28, 2021. Exposures: Breast MRI vs mammography. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mammary and extramammary cascade event rates and associated total and patient out-of-pocket spending in the 6 months following the index test. Results: In this study, 9208 women receiving breast MRI were matched with 9208 women receiving mammography (mean [SD] age, 51.4 [6.7] years). Compared with mammogram recipients, breast MRI recipients had 39.0 additional mammary cascade events per 100 women (95% CI, 33.7-44.2), including 5.0 additional imaging tests (95% CI, 3.8-6.2), 17.3 additional procedures (95% CI, 15.5-19.0), 13.0 additional visits (95% CI, 9.4-17.2), 0.34 additional hospitalizations (95% CI, 0.18-0.50), and 3.0 additional new diagnoses (95% CI, 2.5-3.6). For extramammary cascades, breast MRI recipients had 19.6 additional events per 100 women (95% CI, 8.6-30.7) including 15.8 additional visits (95% CI, 10.2-21.4) and no statistically significant differences in other events. Breast MRI recipients had higher total spending for mammary events ($564 more per woman; 95% CI, $532-$596), extramammary events ($42 more per woman; 95% CI, $16-$69), and overall ($1404 more per woman; 95% CI, $1172-$1636). They also had higher overall out-of-pocket spending ($31 more per woman; 95% CI, $6-$55). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of commercially insured women, breast MRI was associated with more mammary and extramammary cascade events and spending relative to mammography. These findings can inform cost-benefit assessments and coverage policies to ensure breast MRI is reserved for patients for whom benefits outweigh harms.

Understanding linkage to biopsy and treatment for breast cancer after a high-risk telemammography result in Peru: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: This mixed-method study aimed to understand the effectiveness of linkage to biopsy and treatment in women with a high-risk mammography result (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS 4 and 5) in the national telemammography programme and to explore women's experiences during this process. SETTING: Quantitative component: we collected and linked health data from the telemammography reading centre, the national public health insurance, the national centre for disease control and the national referral cancer centre. Qualitative component: we interviewed participants from different regions of the country representing diverse social and geographical backgrounds. PARTICIPANTS: Quantitative: women who underwent telemammography between July 2017 and September 2018 and had high-risk results (BI-RADS 4-5) were collected. Qualitative: women with a high-risk telemammography result, healthcare providers and administrators. OUTCOMES MEASURES: Quantitative: we determined biopsy and treatment linkage rates and delays. Qualitative: we explored barriers and facilitators for obtaining a biopsy and initiating treatment. RESULTS: Of 126 women with high-risk results, 48.4% had documentation of biopsy and 37.5% experienced a delay of >45 days to biopsy. Of 51 women diagnosed with breast cancer, 86.4% had evidence of treatment initiation, but 69.2% initiated treatment >45 days after biopsy. Travelling to major cities for care, administrative factors and breast cancer misconceptions, among other factors, impeded timely, continuous care for breast cancer. A multidisciplinary and culturally tailored patient education facilitated understanding of the disease and prompt decision making about subsequent medical care. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthened breast cancer care capacity outside the capital city, standardised referral pathways, ensured financial support for travel expenses, and enhanced patient education are required to secure linkage to the breast cancer care continuum. Robust information systems are needed to track patients and to evaluate the programme's performance.

BRCA1/2 testing among young women with breast cancer in Massachusetts, 2010-2013: An observational study using state cancer registry and All-Payer claims data.

BACKGROUND: Testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants is recommended for women aged ≤45 years with breast cancer. Some studies have found racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in testing. We linked Massachusetts' All-Payer Claims Database with Massachusetts Cancer Registry data to assess factors associated with BRCA1/2 testing among young women with breast cancer in Massachusetts, a state with high levels of access to care and equitable insurance coverage of breast cancer gene (BRCA) testing. METHODS: We identified breast cancer diagnoses in the Massachusetts Cancer Registry from 2010 to 2013 and linked registry data with Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Data from 2010 to 2014 among women aged ≤45 years with private insurance or Medicaid. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine factors associated with BRCA1/2 testing within 6 months of diagnosis. RESULTS: The study population included 2424 women; 80.3% were identified as non-Hispanic White, 6.4% non-Hispanic Black, and 6.3% Hispanic. Overall, 54.9% received BRCA1/2 testing within 6 months of breast cancer diagnosis. In adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Black women had less than half the odds of testing compared with non-Hispanic White women (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.31, 0.64). Medicaid-insured women had half the odds of testing compared with privately-insured women (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.41, 0.63). Living in lower-income areas was also associated with lower odds of testing. Having an academically-affiliated oncology clinician was not associated with testing. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities exist in BRCA1/2 testing among women with breast cancer in Massachusetts, despite equitable insurance coverage of testing. Further research should examine whether disparities have persisted with growing testing awareness and availability over time.

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.

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.