A single center experience with publicly funded clinical exome sequencing for neurodevelopmental disorders or multiple congenital anomalies.

Exome sequencing (ES) is an important diagnostic tool for individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) and/or multiple congenital anomalies (MCA). However, the cost of ES limits the test's accessibility for many patients. We evaluated the yield of publicly funded clinical ES, performed at a tertiary center in Israel, over a 3-year period (2018-2020). Probands presented with (1) moderate-to-profound global developmental delay (GDD)/intellectual disability (ID); or (2) mild GDD/ID with epilepsy or congenital anomaly; and/or (3) MCA. Subjects with normal chromosomal microarray analysis who met inclusion criteria were included, totaling 280 consecutive cases. Trio ES (proband and parents) was the default option. In 252 cases (90.0%), indication of NDD was noted. Most probands were males (62.9%), and their mean age at ES submission was 9.3 years (range 1 month to 51 years). Molecular diagnosis was reached in 109 probands (38.9%), mainly due to de novo variants (91/109, 83.5%). Disease-causing variants were identified in 92 genes, 15 of which were implicated in more than a single case. Male sex, families with multiple-affected members and premature birth were significantly associated with lower ES yield (p < 0.05). Other factors, including MCA and coexistence of epilepsy, autism spectrum disorder, microcephaly or abnormal brain magnetic resonance imaging findings, were not associated with the yield. To conclude, our findings support the utility of clinical ES in a real-world setting, as part of a publicly funded genetic workup for individuals with GDD/ID and/or MCA.

Randomized study of remote telehealth genetic services versus usual care in oncology practices without genetic counselors.

PURPOSE: To examine the benefit of telehealth over current delivery options in oncology practices without genetic counselors. METHODS: Participants meeting cancer genetic testing guidelines were recruited to this multi-center, randomized trial comparing uptake of genetic services with remote services (telephone or videoconference) to usual care in six predominantly community practices without genetic counselors. The primary outcome was the composite uptake of genetic counseling or testing. Secondary outcomes compare telephone versus videoconference services. RESULTS: 147 participants enrolled and 119 were randomized. Eighty percent of participants in the telehealth arm had genetic services as compared to 16% in the usual care arm (OR 30.52, p < 0.001). Five genetic mutation carriers (6.7%) were identified in the telehealth arm, compared to none in the usual care arm. In secondary analyses, factors associated with uptake were lower anxiety (6.77 vs. 8.07, p = 0.04) and lower depression (3.38 vs. 5.06, p = 0.04) among those who had genetic services. There were no significant differences in change in cognitive or affective outcomes immediately post-counseling and at 6 and 12 months between telephone and videoconference arms. CONCLUSION: Telehealth increases uptake of genetic counseling and testing at oncology practices without genetic counselors and could significantly improve identification of genetic carriers and cancer prevention outcomes.

Achieving universal genetic assessment for women with ovarian cancer: Are we there yet? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Several professional organizations recommend universal genetic assessment for people with ovarian cancer as identifying pathogenic variants can affect treatment, prognosis, and all-cause mortality for patients and relatives. We sought to evaluate the literature on genetic assessment for women with ovarian cancer and determine if any interventions or patient characteristics drive utilization of services. METHODS: We searched key electronic databases to identify trials that evaluated genetic assessment for people with ovarian cancer. Trials with the primary aim to evaluate utilization of genetic assessment with or without interventions were included. Eligible trials were subjected to meta-analysis and the moderating influence of health interventions on rates of genetic assessment were examined. RESULTS: A total of 35 studies were included (19 report on utilization of genetic services without an intervention, 7 with an intervention, and 9 with both scenarios). Without an intervention, pooled estimates for referral to genetic counseling and completion of genetic testing were 39% [CI 27-53%] and 30% [CI 19-44%]. Clinician-facilitated interventions included: mainstreaming of genetic services (99% [CI 86-100%]), telemedicine (75% [CI 43-93%]), clinic-embedded genetic counselor (76% [CI 32-95%]), reflex tumor somatic genetic assessment (64% [CI 17-94%]), universal testing (57% [28-82%]), and referral forms (26% [CI 10-53%]). Random-effects pooled proportions demonstrated that Black vs. White race was associated with a lower rate of genetic testing (26%[CI 17-38%] vs. 40% [CI 25-57%]) as was being un-insured vs. insured (23% [CI 18-28%] vs. 38% [CI 26-53%]). CONCLUSIONS: Reported rates of genetic testing for people with ovarian cancer remain well below the goal of universal testing. Interventions such as mainstreaming can improve testing uptake. Strategies aimed at improving utilization of genetic services should consider existing disparities in race and insurance status.

FLABRA, frontline approach for BRCA testing in an ovarian cancer population: a Latin America epidemiologic study.

Aim: FLABRA evaluated the prevalence of BRCA mutations, genetic counseling and management approaches in patients with ovarian cancer in Latin America. Patients & methods: Patients with ovarian cancer from six Latin-American countries were enrolled. Tumor samples were tested for BRCA mutations (BRCAmut). In cases with BRCAmut, blood samples were analyzed to determine germline versus somatic mutations. Medical records were reviewed for counseling approach and treatment plan. Results: From 472 patients enrolled, 406 samples yielded conclusive results: 282 were BRCA wild-type (BRCAwt), 115 were BRCAmut and nine were variants of uncertain significance. In total, 110/115 were tested for germline mutations (77 germline and 33 somatic). Conclusion: Tumor testing to identify mutations in BRCA1/2 in ovarian cancer can help optimize treatment choices, meaning fewer patients require germline testing and genetic counseling, a scant resource in Latin America. Clinical trial registration: NCT02984423 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Male Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening Recommendations in High-Risk Men Who Undergo Genetic Counseling and Multigene Panel Testing.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest screening mammography may be effective in detecting breast cancer early in high-risk men. We evaluated current screening recommendations as a risk management strategy in men at elevated risk for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant study reviewed consecutive men who underwent genetic counseling and multigene panel testing (MGPT) for breast cancer risk assessment at our institution between 2012 and 2018. Patient risk factors, test indications, and MGPT outcomes were recorded, then correlated with screening recommendations by either clinical breast examination or screening mammography. Recommendation consistency among practitioners was evaluated. Patient adherence to screening mammography (defined as undergoing screening mammography as recommended) was assessed. Statistical analysis was performed at the 2-sided 5% significance level. RESULTS: A total of 414 asymptomatic men underwent both genetic counseling and MGPT (mean age, 47 years; range, 18-91 years) for breast cancer risk assessment. Of this group, 18 (4.3%) of 414 had a personal history of breast cancer, and 159 (38.4%) of 414 had a family history of breast cancer before MGPT. Among 112 men with positive MGPT results, BRCA1/2 mutations were the most common (56.3%, 63/112). Most BRCA mutation carriers (80.9%, 51/63) were recommended clinical breast examination only. Only 5.9% (2/34) BRCA2 and 10.3% (3/29) BRCA1 carriers were recommended screening mammograms (7.9%, 5/63 of all BRCA carriers). Among men with a personal history of breast cancer, only 9 (50%) of 18 were recommended screening mammograms. Overall adherence to screening mammogram in men was 71.4% (10/14), which ultimately yielded two cancers. Breast cancer screening recommendations varied widely among practitioners, with some recommending clinical breast examination only, and others also recommending mammography. CONCLUSION: Men who are found to be at an elevated risk for breast cancer after undergoing genetic counseling and testing currently receive relatively inconsistent screening recommendations.

DNA Mismatch Repair-Deficient Colorectal Carcinoma: Referral Rate for Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment in a Brazilian Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of colorectal cancers (CRCs) are deficient in DNA mismatch repair proteins (dMMR), a characteristic that can occur in both sporadic and hereditary CRC. Due to sparse studies on dMMR CRC in the Brazilian population, we conducted a retrospective analysis of referral rates for Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment of this population and also describing clinical and molecular characterization of these tumors. METHODS: A retrospective, longitudinal, and unicenter study that included patients with dMMR CRC detected by IHC analysis from Pathology Database of our institution, from January 2015 to July 2017. RESULTS: MMR IHC testing was performed in 998 CRC tumors, and 78 tumors (7.8%) had dMMR. The mean age at diagnosis was 56.8 years (17-90), and most patients were female (41 out of 78, 52.6%). Of the 52 patients with right-sided CRC, 40 tumors (77%) had loss of the MLH1 and/or PMS2 expression, and 12 tumors (23%) had loss of MSH2 and/or MSH6 expression (p = 0.005). From 78 patients with dMMR CRC, only 43 patients (55.1%) were referred for genetic counseling (GC), and of them, only 33 patients (76.7%) really went to GC consultation. A total of 21 patients with dMMR CRC performed genetic testing. CONCLUSION: Overall, genetic referral was less than expected in our population. Most of dMMR CRC patients did not receive GC, even in a cancer center, either due to the absence of referral or personal decision and few patients who pursued genetic counseling performed genetic testing.

Health orientation and individual tendencies of a sample of Italian genetic testing consumers.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, genetic testing (GT) had markedly spread in European countries and struggled the debate concerning the psychological effects on the population. The aim of this study was to investigate the individual tendencies of GT consumers in a sample of Italian citizens. METHODS: A total of 152 Italian clients from GenomaLab, a private genetic company, were enrolled from February 2016 to September 2018 and completed an ad hoc survey. RESULTS: Results showed that GT consumers were motivated to preserve their well-being, they felt responsible for their health, they were neither pessimistic nor optimistic toward negative occurrences, and poorly inclined to take high risks in their lives. Participants who had suffered from a disease in the past appear to be less tolerant to the uncertainty for future negative events. CONCLUSION: Our results depict Italian GT consumers as health-oriented, focused on prevention, who do not have a pessimistic perception of their condition but do not like to "bet" on their health, and probably their intention (and belief) is to acquire genetic information in order to reduce uncertainty and increase their decision-making "power" related to their health. Taken together, all these results contribute to describe the population of GT users in European countries, to regulate the provision of GT results and to entail the communication of genetic risk information based on a consumers' personal profile.

A genetic counseling needs assessment of Mexico.

BACKGROUND: While genetic counseling has expanded globally, Mexico has not adopted it as a separate profession. Given the rapid expansion of genetic and genomic services, understanding the current genetic counseling landscape in Mexico is crucial to improving healthcare outcomes. METHODS: Our needs assessment strategy has two components. First, we gathered quantitative data about genetics education and medical geneticists' geographic distribution through an exhaustive compilation of available information across several medical schools and public databases. Second, we conducted semi-structured interviews of 19 key-informants from 10 Mexican states remotely with digital recording and transcription. RESULTS: Across 32 states, ~54% of enrolled medical students receive no medical genetics training, and only Mexico City averages at least one medical geneticist per 100,000 people. Barriers to genetic counseling services include: geographic distribution of medical geneticists, lack of access to diagnostic tools, patient health literacy and cultural beliefs, and education in medical genetics/genetic counseling. Participants reported generally positive attitudes towards a genetic counseling profession; concerns regarding a current shortage of available jobs for medical geneticists persisted. CONCLUSION: To create a foundation that can support a genetic counseling profession in Mexico, the clinical significance of medical genetics must be promoted nationwide. Potential approaches include: requiring medical genetics coursework, developing community genetics services, and increasing jobs for medical geneticists.

The impact of insurance coverage on the prenatal genetic counseling process: An exploration of genetic counselors' experiences with TRICARE.

The prenatal genetic counseling process may be influenced by the patient's insurance coverage for both prenatal testing and termination. Major commercial insurance providers have different policies. TRICARE is the United States Department of Defense health program for uniformed service members. TRICARE provides coverage to approximately 9.4 million beneficiaries, including health plans, special programs, prescriptions, and dental plans. TRICARE's covered medical expenses are outlined in their policies, including those pertaining to genetic testing and termination. This qualitative study aimed to explore the extent to which insurance coverage of prenatal genetic testing and termination of pregnancy affect the genetic counseling process by exploring genetic counselors' experience with TRICARE. The majority of counselors stated that they did not change their overall counseling process for TRICARE patients. However, several counselors expressed that they changed the way they discussed cost with TRICARE patients, specifically in regard to genetic testing. Additionally, counselors provided their perceptions of their patients' emotional experiences. With the recent consolidation of the three TRICARE regions into two TRICARE Regional Office (TRO) regions and the renewal of the Laboratory Developed Tests Demonstration Project, the findings of this study are valuable in the evaluation of TRICARE's coverage of prenatal genetic services.

The uptake of pan-ethnic expanded carrier screening is higher when offered during preconception or early prenatal genetic counseling.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors that influence uptake of expanded carrier screening (ECS) among women undergoing preconception and prenatal genetic counseling. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 500 medical records from women with prenatal or preconception genetic counseling at a prenatal genetic counseling service. We tabulated acceptance of ECS by indication for genetic counseling along with demographic and pregnancy-related factors. RESULTS: ECS was offered to 483 of 500 women, and 192 (39.8%) accepted. Of the 67 women counseled preconceptionally, 46 (68.7%) accepted ECS. This was significantly more than for 416 women counseled during pregnancy, of whom 146 (35.1%) accepted (P ≤ 0.001). For pregnant patients, the mean gestational age of those accepting ECS (12 weeks 3 days; n = 146) was significantly lower than those declining (13 weeks 4 days; n = 270; P ≤ 0.001). The acceptance rates were 7 of 12 (58.3%, P = 0.195) for Ashkenazi Jewish women, 12 of 41 (29.3%; P = 0.186) for Asian women, and 7 of 25 (28.0%; P = 0.241) for women of mixed ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that receiving genetic counseling prior to or earlier in the first trimester is associated with acceptance of ECS and support the importance of early genetic counseling about carrier screening options.

A feasibility study of breast cancer genetic risk assessment in a federally qualified health center.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) endorses routine screening for genetic risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer as a component of primary health care. Implementation of this recommendation may prove challenging, especially in clinics serving disadvantaged communities. METHODS: The authors tested the feasibility of implementing the USPSTF mandate at a federally qualified health center (FQHC) to identify women who were eligible for genetic counseling (GC). A 12-month usual-care phase was followed by a 12-month intervention phase, during which time cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) was systematically performed for all women aged 25 to 69 years who presented for an annual examination. Women who were eligible for GC were recruited to participate in the study. RESULTS: After initiating CGRA, 112 women who were eligible for GC consented to study participation, and 56% of them received a referral for GC from their primary care physician. A subgroup of 50 participants were seen by the same primary care physician during both the usual-care and intervention phases. None of these patients was referred for GC during usual care, compared with 64% after the initiation of CGRA (P < .001). Only 16% of referred participants attended a GC session. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing USPSTF recommendations for CGRA as a standard component of primary health care in FQHCs is feasible and improves referral of minority women for GC, but more work is needed to understand the beliefs and barriers that prevent many underserved women from accessing cancer genetic services.

A survey study with assessment of esophageal screening and genetic counseling in patients with Howel-Evans syndrome.

BACKGROUND: It is important to better understand the role that environmental risk factors play on the development of esophageal cancer in Howel-Evans families. Additionally, there is little published about appropriate esophageal cancer screening practices in families genetically confirmed to have this condition. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to 47 addresses of an American family with Howel-Evans syndrome, of which 29 responded and met inclusion criteria. Data was collected about demographics, environmental risk factors, and medical history of participants. RESULTS: We report characteristics of family members with tylosis, rates of esophageal cancer, rates of genetic counseling, and levels of environmental risk factors. Of the survey respondents, 43% reported features of tylosis, 71.4% were male and 28.6% were female and 28.6% reported leukoplakia. Only 21.4% of tylotic family members smoked, 65% drank alcohol, and 28.6% drank well water. More than half (57.1%) of the tylotic individuals had never had an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and no one had been diagnosed with esophageal carcinoma. Only 3.4% of respondents had ever received genetic testing for Howel-Evans syndrome, despite genetic confirmation of their relatives. CONCLUSIONS: We encourage dermatologists to discuss smoking-cessation, genetic counseling, and early EGD with affected families.

Genetic counseling globally: Where are we now?

The genetic counseling profession is continuing to develop globally, with countries in various stages of development. In some, the profession has been in existence for decades and is increasingly recognized as an important provider of allied health, while in others it is just beginning. In this article, we describe the current global landscape of the genetic counseling specialty field's professional development. Using examples of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, South Africa, and various countries in Asia, we highlight the following: (a) status of genetic counseling training programs, (b) availability of credentialing through government and professional bodies (certification, registration, and licensure), and potential for international reciprocity, (c) scope of clinical practice, and (d) health-care system disparities and cultural differences impacting on practice. The successful global implementation of precision medicine will require both an increased awareness of the importance of the profession of "genetic counselor" and flexibility in how genetic counselors are incorporated into each country's health-care market. In turn, this will require more collaboration within and across nations, along with continuing engagement of existing genetic counseling professional societies.

Genetic Testing in a Population-Based Sample of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors from the REACH Randomized Trial: Cost Barriers and Moderators of Counseling Mode.

Background: This study evaluates predictors of BRCA1/2 testing among breast and ovarian cancer survivors who received genetic counseling as part of a randomized trial and evaluates moderators of counseling mode on testing uptake.Methods: Predictors of BRCA1/2 testing within one year postcounseling were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression in a population-based sample of breast and ovarian cancer survivors at increased hereditary risk randomly assigned to in-person counseling (IPC; n = 379) versus telephone counseling (TC; n = 402). Variables that moderated the association between counseling mode and testing were identified by subgroup analysis.Results: Testing uptake was associated with higher perceived comparative mutation risk [OR = 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-1.57] in the adjusted analysis. Those without cost barriers had higher testing uptake (OR = 18.73; 95% CI, 7.09-49.46). Psychologic distress and perceived comparative mutation risk moderated the effect of counseling and testing. Uptake between IPC versus TC did not differ at low levels of distress and risk, but differed at high distress (26.3% TC vs. 44.3% IPC) and high perceived comparative risk (33.9% TC vs. 50.5% IPC).Conclusions: Cost concerns are a strong determinant of testing. Differences in testing uptake by counseling mode may depend on precounseling distress and risk perceptions.Impact: Cost concerns may contribute to low testing in population-based samples of at-risk cancer survivors. Precounseling psychosocial characteristics should be considered when offering in-person versus telephone counseling. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(12); 1772-80. ©2017 AACR.

Gaps in Incorporating Germline Genetic Testing Into Treatment Decision-Making for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

Purpose Genetic testing for breast cancer risk is evolving rapidly, with growing use of multiple-gene panels that can yield uncertain results. However, little is known about the context of such testing or its impact on treatment. Methods A population-based sample of patients with breast cancer diagnosed in 2014 to 2015 and identified by two SEER registries (Georgia and Los Angeles) were surveyed about genetic testing experiences (N = 3,672; response rate, 68%). Responses were merged with SEER data. A patient subgroup at higher pretest risk of pathogenic mutation carriage was defined according to genetic testing guidelines. Patients' attending surgeons were surveyed about genetic testing and results management. We examined patterns and correlates of genetic counseling and testing and the impact of results on bilateral mastectomy (BLM) use. Results Six hundred sixty-six patients reported genetic testing. Although two thirds of patients were tested before surgical treatment, patients without private insurance more often experienced delays. Approximately half of patients (57% at higher pretest risk, 42% at average risk) discussed results with a genetic counselor. Patients with pathogenic mutations in BRCA1/2 or another gene had the highest rates of BLM (higher risk, 80%; average risk, 85%); however, BLM was also common among patients with genetic variants of uncertain significance (VUS; higher risk, 43%; average risk, 51%). Surgeons' confidence in discussing testing increased with volume of patients with breast cancer, but many surgeons (higher volume, 24%; lower volume, 50%) managed patients with BRCA1/2 VUS the same as patients with BRCA1/2 pathogenic mutations. Conclusion Many patients with breast cancer are tested without ever seeing a genetic counselor. Half of average-risk patients with VUS undergo BLM, suggesting a limited understanding of results that some surgeons share. These findings emphasize the need to address challenges in personalized communication about genetic testing.

Prenatal cfDNA screening results indicative of maternal neoplasm: survey of current practice and management needs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine genetic counselors' current practices and management needs for patients with prenatal cfDNA screening results indicative of maternal neoplasm. METHODS: A survey was completed by genetic counselors recruited via the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC). RESULTS: Over 300 genetic counselors were surveyed. Almost all participants (95%) were aware that Noninvasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) results may suggest maternal neoplasm, and 77% reported they would disclose such results. However, only 29% routinely communicate this possibility to patients in a pre-test setting. Management recommendations made by counselors were highly variable, and over half (51.8%) stated they would feel uncomfortable or very uncomfortable counseling a patient with these results. While less than half (44.3%) believed the current benefits of NIPT's ability to suggest maternal neoplasm outweigh its potential harms, 80.2% recognized it would be beneficial in the future. A vast majority of counselors (91.3%) felt institutional or national guidelines were needed for patient management. CONCLUSION: A majority of counselors neither felt properly equipped nor comfortable counseling patients with prenatal cfDNA results suggestive of maternal neoplasm. This study demonstrates a need for collaboration amongst clinicians, researchers, and laboratories to publish data regarding NIPT results indicative of maternal neoplasm, and for the creation of management guidelines. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Current Status of the Management of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Asia: First Report by the Asian BRCA Consortium.

BACKGROUND: BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations are associated with an increased lifetime risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Compared with the Western developed countries, genetic testing and risk assessment for HBOC in Asia are less available, thus prohibiting the appropriate surveillance, clinical strategies and cancer management. METHODS: The current status of HBOC management in 14 Asian countries, including genetic counselling/testing uptakes and clinical management options, was reviewed. We analysed how economic factors, healthcare and legal frameworks, and cultural issues affect the genetic service availability in Asia. RESULTS: In 2012, only an estimated 4,000 breast cancer cases from 14 Asian countries have benefited from genetic services. Genetic testing costs and the absence of their adoption into national healthcare systems are the main economic barriers for approaching genetic services. Training programmes, regional accredited laboratories and healthcare professionals are not readily available in most of the studied countries. A lack of legal frameworks against genetic discrimination and a lack of public awareness of cancer risk assessment also provide challenges to HBOC management in Asia. CONCLUSIONS: The Asian BRCA Consortium reports the current disparities in genetic services for HBOC in Asia and urges the policy makers, healthcare sectors and researchers to address the limitations in HBOC management.

Utilization and Outcomes of BRCA Genetic Testing and Counseling in a National Commercially Insured Population: The ABOUT Study.

IMPORTANCE: BRCA genetic testing has substantial public health impact, yet little is known of the real-world experiences of the more than 100 000 Americans undergoing testing annually. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with use of BRCA testing, assess whether delivery of genetic counseling and testing services adheres to professional guidelines, and measure the impact on patient-reported outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The American BRCA Outcomes and Utilization of Testing (ABOUT) Study analyzed data from a consecutive national series of 11 159 women whose clinicians ordered BRCA testing between December 2011 and December 2012. Aetna mailed recruitment information across the United States to commercial health plan members whose clinicians had ordered BRCA testing. A total of 3874 women (34.7%) completed questionnaires. Deidentified clinician-reported data from all respondents and a random sample of 2613 nonrespondents were also analyzed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportion of eligible participants who met testing criteria and respondents' report of receiving genetic counseling by a genetics clinician and its association with BRCA knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: Among 3628 women respondents whose clinicians ordered comprehensive BRCA testing, most were white non-Hispanic (2502 [69.0%]), college educated (2953 [81.4%]), married (2751 [75.8%]), and had higher incomes (2011 [55.4%]). Approximately 16.4% (596) did not meet testing criteria. Mutations were identified in 161 (5.3%) of these women who received comprehensive testing. Only 1334 (36.8%) reported receiving genetic counseling from a genetics clinician prior to testing; the lowest rates (130 [12.3%]) were among patients of obstetrician/gynecologists. The most commonly reported reason for not receiving this clinical service was lack of clinician recommendation. Those who received it demonstrated greater knowledge about BRCA (mean score difference adjusted for demographics and clinician specialty, ß = 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83-1.14]; P < .001) and expressed greater understanding (ß = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.41-0.54]; P < .001) and satisfaction (ß = 2.21 [95% CI, 1.60-2.81]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite improved patient knowledge, understanding, and satisfaction among patients who receive genetic counseling provided by a genetics clinician, as well as multiple guidelines emphasizing the importance of genetic counseling, most US women undergoing BRCA genetic testing do not receive this clinical service. Lack of physician recommendation is the most commonly reported reason. These findings demonstrate important gaps in clinical genetics services. Recently mandated coverage of genetic counseling services as a preventive service without patient cost sharing should contribute to improving clinical genetics services and associated outcomes in the future.

Trends in Unmet Need for Genetic Counseling Among Children With Special Health Care Needs, 2001-2010.

OBJECTIVE: Access to genetic counseling is increasingly important to guide families' and clinicians' decision making, yet there is limited research on accessibility and affordability of counseling for families with children with special health care needs (CSHCN). Our study's objectives were to measure changes in unmet need for genetic counseling for CSHCN from 2001 to 2010 and to characterize child, family, and health system factors associated with unmet need. METHODS: We used parent-reported data from the 2001, 2005-2006, and 2009-2010 National Survey of Children With Special Health Care Needs. We used a logistic regression model to measure the impact of survey year, child (sex, age, severity of health condition), family (primary language, household income, insurance, financial problems related to cost of CSHCN's health care), and health system factors (region, genetic counselors per capita, having a usual source of care) on access to genetic counseling. RESULTS: Unmet need for genetic counseling increased significantly in 2009-2010 compared to 2001 (odds ratio 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44-2.47). Being older (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.06), having severe health limitations (aOR 1.72; 95% CI 1.16-2.58), being uninsured (aOR 3.56; 95% CI 2.16-5.87), and having family financial problems due to health care costs (aOR 1.90; 95% CI 1.52-2.38) were significantly associated with greater unmet need for genetic counseling. Having a usual source of care was associated with decreased unmet need (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.37-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Unmet need for genetic counseling has increased over the past 12 years. Uninsurance and financial problems related to health care costs were the largest drivers of unmet need over time.

Genetics and Personal Insurance: the Perspectives of Canadian Cancer Genetic Counselors.

Genetic discrimination in the context of genetic testing has been identified as a concern for symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals for more than three decades. Genetic counselors are often the health care professionals who discuss risks and benefits of genetic testing with patients, thereby making them most appropriate to address patient concerns about genetics and personal insurance (i.e., life, life as related to mortgage or group insurance, disability, critical illness and travel). A pilot study was conducted to ascertain the current practices of Canadian cancer genetic counselors in regard to their discussions with patients about genetic testing and access to personal insurance. Among the 36 counselors surveyed, 100 % reported discussing the issue of genetic testing and personal insurance with their patients. Several factors influenced the content, depth and length of these discussions including age, cancer status, family members, and patients' current and future insurance needs. Counselors reported discussing with patients the possible impact of genetic test results on access to personal insurance, possible access and use of patient genetic information by insurance companies, and whom patients should contact if they have additional questions. The most commonly reported inquiries from patients included questions about the possible impact of genetic testing on their ability to obtain insurance, and the insurability of family members. While 28 % of counselors reported having been contacted by an insurer requesting access to patient information, only one counselor was aware of or could recall the outcome of such a request. This pilot study revealed that issues concerning genetics and personal insurance are commonly discussed in Canadian cancer genetic counseling sessions. Counselors furthermore expressed a need for additional educational resources on the topic of genetics and personal insurance for themselves and their patients.