Stay at home: implementation and impact of virtualising cancer genetic services during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid adoption of virtual clinic processes and healthcare delivery. Herein, we examine the impact of virtualising genetics services at Canada's largest cancer centre. A retrospective review was conducted to evaluate relevant metrics during the 12 weeks prior to and during virtual care, including referral and clinic volumes, patient wait times and genetic testing uptake. The number of appointments and new patients seen were maintained during virtual care. Likewise, there was a significant increase in the number of patients offered testing during virtual care who did not provide a blood sample (176/180 (97.7%) vs 180/243 (74.1%); p<0.001), and a longer median time from the date of pretest genetic counselling to the date a sample was given (0 vs 11 days; p<0.001). Referral volumes significantly decreased during virtual care (35 vs 22; p<0.001), which was accompanied by a decreased median wait time for first appointment (55 days vs 30 days; p<0.001). The rapid virtualisation of cancer genetic services allowed the genetics clinic to navigate the COVID-19 pandemic without compromising clinical volumes or access to genetic testing. There was a decrease in referral volumes and uptake of genetic testing, which may be attributable to pandemic-related clinical restrictions.

Identification and management of Lynch syndrome in the Middle East and North African countries: outcome of a survey in 12 countries.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS), the most common inherited form of colorectal cancer (CRC), is responsible for 3% of all cases of CRC. LS is caused by a mismatch repair gene defect and is characterized by a high risk for CRC, endometrial cancer and several other cancers. Identification of LS is of utmost importance because colonoscopic surveillance substantially improves a patient's prognosis. Recently, a network of physicians in Middle Eastern and North African (ME/NA) countries was established to improve the identification and management of LS families. The aim of the present survey was to evaluate current healthcare for families with LS in this region. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed that addressed the following issues: availability of clinical management guidelines for LS; attention paid to family history of cancer; availability of genetic services for identification and diagnosis of LS; and assessment of knowledge of LS surveillance. Members of the network and authors of recent papers on LS from ME/NA and neighbouring countries were invited to participate in the survey and complete the online questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 55 individuals were invited and 19 respondents from twelve countries including Algeria, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Tunisia, and Turkey completed the questionnaire. The results showed that family history of CRC is considered in less than half of the surveyed countries. Guidelines for the management of LS are available in three out of twelve countries. The identification and selection of families for genetic testing were based on clinical criteria (Amsterdam criteria II or Revised Bethesda criteria) in most countries, and only one country performed universal screening. In most of the surveyed countries genetic services were available in few hospitals or only in a research setting. However, surveillance of LS families was offered in the majority of countries and most frequently consisted of regular colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: The identification and management of LS in ME/NA countries are suboptimal and as a result most LS families in the region remain undetected. Future efforts should focus on increasing awareness of LS amongst both the general population and doctors, and on the improvement of the infrastructure in these countries.

Organizational readiness to implement population-based screening and genetic service delivery for hereditary cancer prevention and control.

Despite clinical guidelines, programs conducting population-based screening and genetic service delivery for hereditary cancer prevention and control are rare in practice. We interviewed individuals (n = 13) instrumental in implementing seven unique clinical programs conducting either universal tumor screening for Lynch Syndrome or routine family history screening and provision of genetic services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in the United States. To characterize determinants of readiness to implement population-based cancer genetic service delivery models, interviews and deductive codes drew on Weiner's theory of organizational readiness for change. Qualitative analysis identified themes across programs. The degree to which organizational stakeholders valued moving to a population-based genetic service delivery model depended on the existence of aligned clinical guidelines at the time of program implementation. However, judgments of implementation capacity within the organization, particularly with respect to task demands and resource concerns, were more often barriers to readiness. Program champions were essential to facilitating readiness, frequently taking on substantial uncompensated work. These data suggest that developing interventions targeting change efficacy and cultivating practice change champions may be two promising ways to increase uptake of population-based hereditary cancer screening and genetic service delivery in clinical practice.

Patterns of referral and uptake of BReast CAncer (BRCA) gene testing of eligible women with ovarian cancer in New Zealand.

AIMS: To determine the proportion of eligible patients with high-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, fallopian tube or peritoneum discussed at gynaecological oncology multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) in New Zealand and subsequently referred for genetic counselling and BRCA pathogenic variant testing. METHODS: Eligible cases were identified from Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin gynaecologic oncology MDM databases between 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2016. Patients who met the eligibility criteria for genetics referral were identified, and cross-referenced against genetic services databases to ascertain the rates of referrals received, the numbers attending appointments, genetic testing offered and range of results. RESULTS: During the two-year period, 205 patients were eligible for referral. Of these, 143 (70%) patients were referred for genetic counselling with 128 (90%) of this group recommended for BRCA pathogenic variant testing. Of the 126 who undertook the test, results were available for 120 (95%). Nineteen patients (16%) tested positive for a germline BRCA pathogenic variant. CONCLUSIONS: The New Zealand rate of referral to genetic counselling for women with high-grade serous cancer, (HGSC), of the ovary, fallopian tube or peritoneum diagnosed between 2015-2016 is encouraging when compared with others internationally. The rate of BRCA positive pathogenic variants is comparable to international data.

Evolution of Hereditary Breast Cancer Genetic Services: Are Changes Reflected in the Knowledge and Clinical Practices of Florida Providers?

AIMS: We describe practitioner knowledge and practices related to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) in an evolving landscape of genetic testing. METHODS: A survey was mailed in late 2013 to Florida providers who order HBOC testing. Descriptive statistics were conducted to characterize participants' responses. RESULTS: Of 101 respondents, 66% indicated either no genetics education or education through a commercial laboratory. Although 79% of respondents were aware of the Supreme Court ruling resulting in the loss of Myriad Genetics' BRCA gene patent, only 19% had ordered testing from a different laboratory. With regard to pretest counseling, 78% of respondents indicated they usually discuss 11 of 14 nationally recommended elements for informed consent. Pretest discussion times varied from 3 to 120 min, with approximately half spending <20 min. Elements not routinely covered by >40% of respondents included (1) possibility of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) and (2) issues related to life/disability insurance. With regard to genetic testing for HBOC, 88% would test an unaffected sister of a breast cancer patient identified with a BRCA VUS. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the need to identify whether variability in hereditary cancer service delivery impacts patient outcomes. Findings also reveal opportunities to facilitate ongoing outreach and education.

Developing clinical cancer genetics services in resource-limited countries: the case of retinoblastoma in Kenya.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Clinical cancer genetics is an integral part of cancer control and management, yet its development as an essential medical service has been hindered in many low-and-middle-income countries. We report our experiences in developing a clinical cancer genetics service for retinoblastoma in Kenya. METHODS: A genetics task force was created from within the membership of the existing Kenyan National Retinoblastoma Strategy group. The task force engaged in multiple in-person and telephone discussions, delineating experiences, opinions and suggestions for an evidence-based, culturally sensitive retinoblastoma genetics service. Discussions were recorded and thematically categorized to develop a strategy for the design and implementation of a national retinoblastoma clinical genetics service. RESULTS: Discussion among the retinoblastoma genetics task force supported the development of a comprehensive genetics service that rests on 3 pillars: (1) patient and family counseling, (2) community involvement, and (3) medical education. CONCLUSIONS: A coordinated national retinoblastoma genetics task force led to the creation of a unique and relevant approach to delivering comprehensive and accurate genetic care to Kenyan retinoblastoma patients. The task force aims to stimulate innovative approaches in cancer genetics research, education and knowledge translation, taking advantage of unique opportunities offered in the African context.

Patients with genetic cancer undergoing surveillance at a specialized clinic rate the quality of their care better than patients at non-specialized clinics.

OBJECTIVES: To compare ratings of quality of care between patients with genetic cancer who receive specialized care with patients who receive non-specialized care while controlling for socio-demographic and clinical variables; MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients in a national cohort of adult patients diagnosed with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) who had undergone prophylactic colorectal surgery were assessed (n = 276, response rate 76%). Quality of care was measured with the Quality of Care from the Patient Perspective (QPP). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed; RESULTS: Patients receiving specialized care were significantly more likely to report the quality of care as better in all three QPP dimensions investigated than those receiving non-specialized care; CONCLUSIONS: In order to promote and maintain good quality of care for surgically treated patients with FAP, and to minimize the risk of cancer, specialized care, including continuity and easy access of health care professionals, should be provided.

Genetic service delivery: infrastructure, assessment and information.

Identification of genomic determinants of complex disorders such as cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular disease has prompted public health systems to focus on genetic service delivery for prevention of these disorders, adding to their previous efforts in birth defects prevention and newborn screening. This focus is consistent with previously identified obligations of the public health system as well as the core functions of public health identified by the Institute of Medicine. Models of service delivery include provision of services by the primary care provider in conjunction with subspecialists, provision of services through the medical home with co-management by genetics providers, provision of services in conjunction with disorder-specific treatment centers, and provision of services through a network of genetics clinics linked to medical homes. Whatever the model for provision of genetic services, tools to assist providers include facilities for outreach and telemedicine, information technology, just-in-time management plans, and emergency management tools. Assessment tools to determine which care is best are critical for quality improvement and development of best practices. Because the workforce of genetics providers is not keeping pace with the need for services, an understanding of the factors contributing to this lag is important, as is the development of an improved knowledge base in genomics for primary care providers.

Cancer genetic risk assessment for individuals at risk of familial breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The recognition of an inherited component to breast cancer has led to an increase in demand for information, reassurance, and genetic testing, which has resulted in the creation of genetic clinics for familial cancer. The first step for patients referred to a cancer genetic clinic is a risk assessment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of cancer genetic risk-assessment services on patients at risk of familial breast cancer. SEARCH METHODS: The specialised register maintained by the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group was searched on 16th February 2005. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycLIT, CENTRAL, DARE, ASSIA, Web of Science, SIGLE and LILACS. The original searches covered the period 1985 to February 2005. We also handsearched relevant journals. For this review update the search was repeated through to April 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered trials looking at interventions for cancer genetic risk-assessment services for familial breast cancer for inclusion. Trials assessed outcomes such as understanding of risk, satisfaction and psychological well-being. We excluded studies if they concerned cancers other than breast cancer or if participants were not at risk of inherited breast cancer. We also excluded trials concerning the provision of general cancer genetic information or education as this review was concerned with the delivery of genetic risk assessment. Participants could be individuals of any age or gender, with or without a known BRCA mutation, but without a previous history of breast cancer or any other serious illness. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Additional information was sought from investigators as necessary. Due to the heterogeneity of both the interventions and outcomes, we reported data descriptively. MAIN RESULTS: In this review update, we included five new trials, bringing the total number of included studies to eight. The included trials (pertaining to 10 papers), provided data on 1973 participants and assessed the impact of cancer genetic risk assessment on outcomes including perceived risk of inherited cancer, and psychological distress. This review suggests that cancer genetic risk-assessment services help to reduce distress, improve the accuracy of the perceived risk of breast cancer, and increase knowledge about breast cancer and genetics. The health professional delivering the risk assessment does not appear to have a significant impact on these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found favourable outcomes for patients after risk assessment for familial breast cancer. However, there were too few papers to make any significant conclusions about how best to deliver cancer genetic risk-assessment services. Further research is needed assessing the best means of delivering cancer risk assessment, by different health professionals, in different ways and in alternative locations.

The role of institutional entrepreneurs in reforming healthcare.

We draw on institutional entrepreneurship theory to analyse the dynamics of institutional change in a healthcare context. The focus of our interest is in the relationship between an institutional entrepreneur's 'subject position', defined in terms of their structural and normative legitimacy within the existing institutional landscape, and the nature of the change enacted. We develop this approach through an examination of the implementation of new pathways for cancer genetic services within the English National Health Service. Employing comparative case analysis we show that those who have limited structural legitimacy under prevailing conditions are most willing to engender change, but also least able; whereas those who have strong structural legitimacy are most able, but often least willing. However, those who are able rhetorically to combine a balance of structural and normative legitimacy are most able to produce change. In doing so, we demonstrate the importance of the concept of institutional entrepreneurship to understand healthcare reform.

Duty to warn and genetic disease.

In this clinical column, we discuss the ambiguous distinction between genetic research and clinical genetics, particularly for Mendelian diseases with high recurrence risk, high morbidity and/or mortality and the possible amelioration of such diseases by screening or treatment. We use arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy as an example of a lethal Mendelian disorder, which prompted the discussion contained in this column. Working with such diseases may mean that genetic researchers have some responsibility for both immediate research subjects and their extended families, as they obtain molecular genetic information. For some diseases, therefore, a willingness to accept genetic research results should be an inclusion criterion, and it may be considered unethical for research ethics boards to approve genetic studies unless measures to ensure clinical follow-up have been established. We recommend managing the tensions between genetic research and clinical practice by using disease-based genetic registers, organized within a clinical genetic service.

Bringing genetics into primary care: findings from a national evaluation of pilots in England.

OBJECTIVES: Developments in genetic knowledge and clinical applications are seen as rendering traditional modes of organizing genetics provision increasingly inappropriate. In common with a number of developed world countries the UK has sought to increase the role of primary care in delivering such services. However, efforts to reconfigure service delivery face multiple challenges associated with divergent policy objectives, organizational boundaries and professional cultures. This paper presents findings from an evaluation of an English initiative to integrate genetics into 'mainstream' clinical provision in the National Health Service. METHODS: Qualitative research in 11 case-study sites focusing on attempts by pilots funded by the initiative to embed knowledge and provision within primary care illustrating barriers faced and the ways in which these were surmounted. RESULTS: Lack of intrinsic interest in clinical genetics among primary care staff was compounded by national targets that focused their attention elsewhere and by service structures that rendered genetics a peripheral concern demanding minimal engagement. Established divisions between the commissioning of mainstream and specialist services, along with the pressures of shorter-term targets, impeded ongoing funding. CONCLUSIONS: More wide-ranging policy and organizational support is required if the aim of entrenching genetics knowledge and practice across the Health Service is to be realized.

Health-related quality of life measures in genetic disorders: an outcome variable for consideration in clinical trials.

The field of medical genetics is rapidly advancing, and therapeutic options to treat genetic syndromes are becoming increasingly available. An understanding of the pathophysiology of various genetic disorders has provided researchers the opportunity to propose and test pharmacologic agents in preclinical murine models with hopes of translation to human trials. The development of clinical trials can be costly and time consuming, particularly for rare conditions. Pilot feasibility studies should be performed when designing clinical trials for genetic disorders. The development and selection of appropriate outcome measures are particularly paramount in the implementation of clinical trials. The selection of inappropriate outcome measures can lead to non-measurable differences or clinically insignificant findings. In addition, just as age appropriate measures are needed, some instruments may not apply to populations with specific genetic disorders that have significant cognitive and physical impairment, as the measures may not be sensitive enough to identify clinically significant changes. In the last decade, health-related quality of life measures (HRQOL) have been increasingly included as an outcome measure in clinical trials. While traditional clinical outcomes are important, these newly developed instruments should be considered along with clinical indicators as measures of effect in clinical trials of interventions in genetic disorders.

Improving genetic health care: a Northern New England pilot project addressing the genetic evaluation of the child with developmental delays or intellectual disability.

In 2006, all clinical genetics practices in Northern New England (Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine) formed a learning collaborative with the purpose of improving genetic health care and outcomes. This article describes the current status of this effort. The methodology is based on our own modifications of the Institute of Healthcare Improvement "Breakthrough Series" and the Northern New England Cystic Fibrosis Consortium. Because of similarities across practices and the availability of existing published practice parameters, the clinical genetics evaluation of the child with developmental delay or intellectual disability was chosen as the topic to be studied. The aim was to improve the rate of etiological diagnosis of those with developmental delays referred to each genetics center by improving the processes of care. Process and outcomes were evaluated. Four of five sites also evaluated the impact of array comparative genomic hybridization (a-CGH) laboratory testing of such patients. There was significant site-to-site variation in the rate of new diagnoses by a-CGH with the average new diagnosis rate of 11.8% (range 5.4-28.8%). Barriers to implementation of the process and outcome data collection and analysis were significant and related to time pressures, lack of personnel or staff to support this activity, and competing quality improvement initiatives at the institutional home of some genetics centers.

Delivery of genomic medicine for common chronic adult diseases: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: The greatest public health benefit of advances in understanding the human genome may be realized for common chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and cancer. Attempts to integrate such knowledge into clinical practice are still in the early stages, and as a result, many questions surround the current state of this translation. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize current information on genetic health services for common adult-onset conditions by examining studies that have addressed the outcomes, consumer information needs, delivery, and challenges in integrating these services. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE articles published between January 2000 and February 2008. STUDY SELECTION: Original research articles and systematic reviews dealing with common chronic adult-onset conditions were reviewed. A total of 3371 citations were reviewed, 170 articles retrieved, and 68 articles included in the analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were independently extracted by one reviewer and checked by another with disagreement resolved by consensus. Variables assessed included study design and 4 key areas: outcomes of genomic medicine, consumer information needs, delivery of genomic medicine, and challenges and barriers to integration of genomic medicine. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixty-eight articles contributed data to the synthesis: 5 systematic reviews, 8 experimental studies, 35 surveys, 7 pre/post studies, 3 observational studies, and 10 qualitative reports. Three systematic reviews, 4 experimental studies, and 9 additional studies reported on outcomes of genetic services. Generally there were modest positive effects on psychological outcomes such as worry and anxiety, behavioral outcomes have shown mixed results, and clinical outcomes were less well studied. One systematic review, 1 randomized controlled trial, and 14 other studies assessed consumer information needs and found in general that genetics knowledge was reported to be low but that attitudes were generally positive. Three randomized controlled trials and 13 other studies assessed how genomic medicine is delivered and newer models of delivery. One systematic review and 19 other studies assessed barriers; the most consistent finding was the self-assessed inadequacy of the primary care workforce to deliver genetic services. Additional identified barriers included lack of oversight of genetic testing and concerns about privacy and discrimination. CONCLUSION: Many gaps in knowledge about organization, clinician, and patient needs must be filled to translate basic and clinical science advances in genomics of common chronic diseases into practice.

Cultural enhancement of a clinical service to meet the needs of indigenous people; genetic service development in response to issues for New Zealand Maori.

The delivery of good health care services within clinical settings is predicated by an understanding of the needs of the stakeholders. Most of the information generated to date on the transfer of mutational analysis to clinical service has been within a Eurocentric model favouring individual autonomy. It is predictable that this model does not easily translate for other cultures. Current genetic technology has elucidated the molecular basis of many diseases. In familial cancer and other late-onset disorders, there is now the possibility of 'prediction' where a high risk conferred by family history can be confirmed or negated by genetic testing. In paediatric disorders, prediction is offered in the form of prenatal or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. We report on the processes undertaken in an attempt to provide a culturally sensitive service for the Maori people of Aotearoa, New Zealand.

Servicios para la atención y la prevención de defectos congénitos: Síntesis de una reunión de la Organización Mundial de la Salud y la Fundación March of Dimes / Services for the care and prevention of birth defects. Reduced report of a World Health Organization and March of Dimes Foundation meeting

On 17-19 May 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation held a meeting in Geneva: The Management of Birth Defects and Haemoglobin Disorders. Meeting participants included 18 experts from developing and industrialized countries, including the author and nine staff from WHO Headquarters. The meeting had five goals: (A) ratify the data on the global toll of birth defects presented in the MOD Global Report; (B) agree upon a definition of terms; (C) develop a collaborative plan for strengthening care and prevention of birth defects; (D) develop a plan for strengthening care and prevention of haemoglobin disorders; and (E) determine how potential stakeholders could contribute to these efforts. The consensus for each of the goals were: a) Participants endorsed the estimates in the MOD Global Report, b) Participants concluded that the term "birth defect" is synonymous with the term "congenital disorder", whereas the term "congenital anomalies" should be avoided, c) Participants agreed that 70 percent of birth defects could be prevented, ameliorated or treated effectively, by the strengthening of medical genetic services, d) Participants agreed that efforts must be made to improve the control of hemoglobin disorders in developing countries, and e) Progress will require the combined efforts and political will of the WHO.

Providing a community-based cancer risk assessment service for a socially and ethnically diverse population.

BACKGROUND: Patients from ethnic minorities are under-represented in referrals to cancer genetics services. In a regional genetics centre that serves two London boroughs, the existing service attracts 3% of its referrals from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) and other ethnic groups, despite the fact that these groups make up 34% of the population. OBJECTIVES: To improve access to familial cancer risk assessment in a socially and ethnically diverse population. SETTING: The London boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark. DESIGN: Community-based, nurse-led clinics were established for people who were concerned about their familial cancer risk. Patients were asked to triage themselves by answering three questions. Self-referral was encouraged. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were gathered on ethnicity of clients, cancer risk, source of referral and patient and health professional satisfaction with the service. RESULTS: Of the 415 people who have accessed the service, 46% were from not White British groups and 67% referred themselves to the service, demonstrating the success of this model in reaching 'hard to reach' groups. Thirty-seven percent of patients were assessed as being at population risk and 63% were assessed as being at moderate risk or higher, showing that the clinics were meeting an unmet need in the community.