Predictors of Women's Intentions to Communicate Updated Genetic Test Results to Immediate and Extended Family Members.

INTRODUCTION: Many individuals who previously received negative genetic test results are eligible for updated testing. This study examined intention to communicate updated genetic test results to relatives in participants who previously received negative genetic test results. METHODS: Women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer who tested negative for BRCA1/2 before 2013 were enrolled between April 2018 and October 2019. Proportions were calculated to assess intention to communicate updated genetic test results to living immediate family, extended family, and all family. Potential predictors of intentions from the theory of planned behavior (attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control) were assessed. The three outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear models with a quasi-binomial probability distribution. RESULTS: 110 women completed the baseline assessment prior to updated testing. Participants intended to communicate genetic test results to 90% of immediate family, 51% of extended family, and 66% of all living relatives. Participants with higher subjective norms (aOR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.08-3.57) had higher intentions to communicate genetic test results to extended family, while participants with more positive attitudes (aOR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.01-1.60) had higher intentions to communicate to all family. Placing higher importance on genetic information was associated with higher intentions to communicate to immediate family (aOR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.06-1.83). Lower subjective numeracy was associated with higher intentions to communicate to extended family (aOR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.32-0.76). CONCLUSION: Attitudes and subjective norms were predictors of intention to communicate updated genetic information to at-risk biological relatives, and predictors may vary by degree of relationship.

The diagnostic experience of women with fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI).

PURPOSE: The fragile X premutation occurs when there are 55-200 CGG repeats in the 5' UTR of the FMR1 gene. An estimated 1 in 148 women carry a premutation, with 20-30% of these individuals at risk for fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI). Diagnostic experiences of FXPOI have not previously been included in the literature, limiting insight on experiences surrounding the diagnosis. This study identifies barriers and facilitators to receiving a FXPOI diagnosis and follow-up care, which can inform care and possibly improve quality of life. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 24 women with FXPOI exploring how FMR1 screening, physician education, and supportive care impacted their experience. Three subgroups were compared: women diagnosed through family history who have biological children, women diagnosed through family history who do not have biological children, and women diagnosed through symptoms of POI. RESULTS: Themes from interviews included hopes for broader clinician awareness of FXPOI, clear guidelines for clinical treatment, and proper fertility workups to expand reproductive options prior to POI onset. Participants also spoke of difficulty finding centralized sources of care. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate a lack of optimal care of women with a premutation particularly with respect to FMR1 screening for molecular diagnosis, short- and long-term centralized treatment, and clinical and emotional support. The creation of a "FXPOI health navigator" could serve as a centralized resource for the premutation patient population, assisting in connection to optimal treatment and appropriate referrals, including genetic counseling, mental health resources, advocacy organizations, and better-informed physicians.

BRCA1/2 Variants Identified Through Tumor Genomic Profiling: Assessing Genetic Counseling Outcomes.

PURPOSE: As tumor genomic profiling (TGP) is increasingly used to help guide cancer treatment, BRCA variants, which may or may not be reflective of the germline genome, are being identified. As TGP use increases, it is becoming an important tool for referral to genetic counseling and identifying patients with hereditary cancer syndromes such as hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. This study explores genetic counseling referral patterns and germline implications of patients found to have pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants identified through TGP. METHODS: Participants include patients at Huntsman Cancer Institute undergoing TGP through a single commercial laboratory between March 2014 and July 2018. A retrospective chart review was conducted for 62 patients found to have pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1/2 on TGP. Data on genetic counseling referrals and uptake, germline test results, family history, and patient demographics were collected. RESULTS: In the study time frame, 1,899 patients underwent TGP. Testing identified 67 PVs in BRCA1 (23 variants) or BRCA2 (44 variants) in 62 patients. Thirty-five patients first received a referral to a genetic counselor following TGP with 33 patients completing genetic counseling. Of the 30 patients who pursued germline genetic testing following TGP, 11 were discovered to have a previously unknown germline BRCA PV. Nine of these patients were the first in their family diagnosed with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. CONCLUSION: This study represents one institution's experience with genetic counseling referrals, uptake, and germline results following TGP. For some patients, TGP will be the first indicator of an underlying hereditary condition. Identifying patients with PVs (which may be germline) through TGP is an important new genetic counseling referral tool that can have important implications for the patient and their family.

Clinical Impact of Pathogenic Variants in DNA Damage Repair Genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 in Breast and Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Consensus guidelines for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer include management recommendations for pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, and other DNA damage repair (DDR) genes beyond BRCA1 or BRCA2. We report on clinical management decisions across three academic medical centers resulting from P/LP findings in DDR genes in breast/ovarian cancer patients. Among 2184 patients, 156 (7.1%) carried a P/LP variant in a DDR gene. Clinical follow-up information was available for 101/156 (64.7%) patients. Genetic test result-based management recommendations were made for 57.8% (n = 59) of patients and for 64.7% (n = 66) of patients' family members. Most recommendations were made for moderate-to-high risk genes and were consistent with guidelines. Sixty-six percent of patients (n = 39/59) implemented recommendations. This study suggests that P/LP variants in DDR genes beyond BRCA1 and BRCA2 can change clinical management recommendations for patients and their family members, facilitate identification of new at-risk carriers, and impact treatment decisions. Additional efforts are needed to improve the implementation rates of genetic-testing-based management recommendations for patients and their family members.

Uptake of genetic counseling and multi-gene panel testing among women in the Intermountain West with previous negative BRCA1 and BRCA2 results contacted for updated testing.

Women with a personal history of breast or ovarian cancer who previously had BRCA1/2 testing now have the opportunity for additional genetic risk information through multi-gene panel testing. However, little is known about women's receptivity to further contact and uptake of genetic counseling and updated genetic testing. Utilizing a clinic database to identify potential participants, we prospectively contacted women in the United States with a personal and/or family history of breast or ovarian cancer who had negative BRCA1/2 testing, which was performed primarily between 2011 and 2018. Eligible and interested participants were scheduled for a genetic counseling appointment to discuss updated genetic testing using a multi-gene panel. We attempted to contact 455 participants, screened 203 (45%), and 103 (23%) completed a pre-test genetic counseling visit to discuss updated testing. Of these, 88 participants had updated multi-gene panel testing. Participants had an average age of 59 years, and most (78%) had breast cancer with an average age of 45 at diagnosis. The majority (97%) of participants were white. Of participants who underwent panel testing, 13% (n = 11) had at least one pathogenic variant identified. Most participants (86%) had an out-of-pocket cost of $100 or less for their panel. There is a sizable population of women with a personal and/or family history of breast or ovarian cancer and negative BRCA1/2 test results who would qualify for updated multi-gene panel testing. In our study, 59% of those reached who were eligible completed a pre-test genetic counseling visit. Clinics could consider an outreach program to offer genetic counseling and updated genetic testing. Supports for this type of effort may include coordinators and genetic counseling assistants and an available database with patients' contact information and prior genetic test results. Updated testing allows women more information about their risk and may expand the value of genetic counseling.

Patient Interactions With an Automated Conversational Agent Delivering Pretest Genetics Education: Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer genetic testing to assess an individual's cancer risk and to enable genomics-informed cancer treatment has grown exponentially in the past decade. Because of this continued growth and a shortage of health care workers, there is a need for automated strategies that provide high-quality genetics services to patients to reduce the clinical demand for genetics providers. Conversational agents have shown promise in managing mental health, pain, and other chronic conditions and are increasingly being used in cancer genetic services. However, research on how patients interact with these agents to satisfy their information needs is limited. OBJECTIVE: Our primary aim is to assess user interactions with a conversational agent for pretest genetics education. METHODS: We conducted a feasibility study of user interactions with a conversational agent who delivers pretest genetics education to primary care patients without cancer who are eligible for cancer genetic evaluation. The conversational agent provided scripted content similar to that delivered in a pretest genetic counseling visit for cancer genetic testing. Outside of a core set of information delivered to all patients, users were able to navigate within the chat to request additional content in their areas of interest. An artificial intelligence-based preprogrammed library was also established to allow users to ask open-ended questions to the conversational agent. Transcripts of the interactions were recorded. Here, we describe the information selected, time spent to complete the chat, and use of the open-ended question feature. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative measures, and thematic analyses were used for qualitative responses. RESULTS: We invited 103 patients to participate, of which 88.3% (91/103) were offered access to the conversational agent, 39% (36/91) started the chat, and 32% (30/91) completed the chat. Most users who completed the chat indicated that they wanted to continue with genetic testing (21/30, 70%), few were unsure (9/30, 30%), and no patient declined to move forward with testing. Those who decided to test spent an average of 10 (SD 2.57) minutes on the chat, selected an average of 1.87 (SD 1.2) additional pieces of information, and generally did not ask open-ended questions. Those who were unsure spent 4 more minutes on average (mean 14.1, SD 7.41; P=.03) on the chat, selected an average of 3.67 (SD 2.9) additional pieces of information, and asked at least one open-ended question. CONCLUSIONS: The pretest chat provided enough information for most patients to decide on cancer genetic testing, as indicated by the small number of open-ended questions. A subset of participants were still unsure about receiving genetic testing and may require additional education or interpersonal support before making a testing decision. Conversational agents have the potential to become a scalable alternative for pretest genetics education, reducing the clinical demand on genetics providers.

Implications of Multigene Panel Testing on Psychosocial Outcomes: A Comparison of Patients With Pancreatic and Breast or Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for germline genetic testing have included pancreatic cancer in the context of additional family cancer history for many years but this was not recommended for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) independent of a family history until 2019. This hypothesis-generating study reports the results from multigene panel testing for PDAC patients at an academic medical center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective longitudinal feasibility study examined responses to genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among PDAC and breast or ovarian cancer (BrOv) patients between October 2016 and November 2017. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed perceptions of genetic risk and testing, recall, comprehension, and emotional reactions to results using open-ended and closed-ended items. RESULTS: Forty-six BrOv and 33 PDAC patients were enrolled, and 44 BrOv and 31 PDAC participants underwent genetic testing. Seven pathogenic variants were identified in six BrOv participants (13.6%), and three pathogenic variants were identified in three PDAC participants (9.7%). The majority of both cohorts expressed similar attitudes about the importance of genetic testing for their personal and family medical management and expressed accurate understanding of implications of their results. Although sample size was small, there were no significant differences between the BrOv and PDAC cohorts for positive or negative emotions. CONCLUSION: This study points to high rates of positive emotions and low rates of negative emotions following genetic test results, suggesting that the emotional reactions to genetic test results are similar for patients with BrOv and PDAC, despite poor prognosis with PDAC diagnoses. Because of the unique needs of the PDAC population following diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach to germline genetic testing following diagnosis may result in best patient and family member outcomes.

The Effects of At-Birth Adoption on Atypical Behavior and Anxiety: A Nonhuman Primate Model.

OBJECTIVE: Adopted children tend to show an increased risk for a variety of psychopathological outcomes, even when adoption occurs at birth, which some suggest is a result of nonrandom assignment of adoptees and parents. This study uses a nonhuman primate model, in which adoptions were randomly assigned, to investigate the behavioral and physiological outcomes associated with at-birth adoption. METHOD: Immediately following birth, rhesus monkey infants were randomly assigned to be reared by either their biological mother (n = 113) or by an unrelated, lactating, adoptive mother (n = 34). At 6 months of age, infant behavior and physiology were assessed during a stressful series of mother-infant separations. Four years later, stress-related behaviors were measured following confrontation by an unfamiliar intruder, an ecologically meaningful stressor. RESULTS: When compared to infants reared by their biological mothers, adopted infants exhibited more behavioral withdrawal and higher plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) concentrations in response to separation. These behavioral differences persisted 4 years later during a stressful intruder challenge, with adoptees exhibiting more behavioral withdrawal, stereotypies, and impulsive approaches of the potentially aggressive intruder. CONCLUSION: Compared to infants reared by their biological mothers, adopted infants exhibited more behavioral inhibition, impulsivity, and higher ACTH concentrations, even when subjects were randomly assigned to be adopted or to remain with their biological mother. To the extent that these findings generalize to humans, they suggest that the overall risk for psychopathology in adopted individuals persists even after random assignment to adoption conditions.

Comparing models of delivery for cancer genetics services among patients receiving primary care who meet criteria for genetic evaluation in two healthcare systems: BRIDGE randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Advances in genetics and sequencing technologies are enabling the identification of more individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility who could benefit from tailored screening and prevention recommendations. While cancer family history information is used in primary care settings to identify unaffected patients who could benefit from a cancer genetics evaluation, this information is underutilized. System-level population health management strategies are needed to assist health care systems in identifying patients who may benefit from genetic services. In addition, because of the limited number of trained genetics specialists and increasing patient volume, the development of innovative and sustainable approaches to delivering cancer genetic services is essential. METHODS: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial, entitled Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE), to address these needs. The trial is comparing uptake of genetic counseling, uptake of genetic testing, and patient adherence to management recommendations for automated, patient-directed versus enhanced standard of care cancer genetics services delivery models. An algorithm-based system that utilizes structured cancer family history data available in the electronic health record (EHR) is used to identify unaffected patients who receive primary care at the study sites and meet current guidelines for cancer genetic testing. We are enrolling eligible patients at two healthcare systems (University of Utah Health and New York University Langone Health) through outreach to a randomly selected sample of 2780 eligible patients in the two sites, with 1:1 randomization to the genetic services delivery arms within sites. Study outcomes are assessed through genetics clinic records, EHR, and two follow-up questionnaires at 4 weeks and 12 months after last genetic counseling contactpre-test genetic counseling. DISCUSSION: BRIDGE is being conducted in two healthcare systems with different clinical structures and patient populations. Innovative aspects of the trial include a randomized comparison of a chatbot-based genetic services delivery model to standard of care, as well as identification of at-risk individuals through a sustainable EHR-based system. The findings from the BRIDGE trial will advance the state of the science in identification of unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility and delivery of genetic services to those patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: BRIDGE is registered as NCT03985852 . The trial was registered on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov .

Unanswered Questions: Hereditary breast and gynecological cancer risk assessment in transgender adolescents and young adults.

Transgender (TG) individuals have higher rates of mortality associated with cancer diagnoses, in part due to avoidance of gender-assigned cancer screenings resulting in later stages at diagnosis. Knowledge about the risks of breast or gynecological cancer in TG and nonbinary (NB) persons receiving gender-affirming hormone therapy is limited. Even less information exists regarding the subset of individuals with genetic predisposition for these malignancies. We performed a retrospective literature review of studies from the last 15 years on breast cancer rates and identified risks in TG persons. An accumulating body of data on breast cancer incidence in TG persons suggests higher than previously believed rates of breast cancer in TG women compared with cisgender men and risk correlating with duration of hormone use. Few studies have examined other cancer risks in TG populations. To date, only three publications address the association with BRCA1/2 mutation presence and breast cancer incidence in TG persons. Meanwhile, there is growing awareness and social acceptance of TG/NB identities coupled with recognition of gender dysphoria at increasingly earlier ages. No information directly addressing cancer risk counseling in TG/NB adolescents and young adults with a family history of cancer or hereditary cancer syndrome exists. Whether the presence of a known genetic predisposition or strong family cancer history may affect cancer risk in these populations is unknown, leading to significant gaps in clinicians' ability to accurately and appropriately estimate cancer risks and counsel those with genetic predisposition on the risks/benefits associated with surgical options and the initiation, duration, and dosing of gender-affirming hormone therapies. A series of three cases illustrates the utility of cancer risk assessment and genetic testing in TG/NB adolescents and young adults, and the unique challenges and unanswered questions that are encountered in the process.

Population prevalence of individuals meeting criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer testing.

BACKGROUND: Personal cancer diagnosis and family cancer history factor into which individuals should undergo genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome. Family history is often determined in the research setting through kindreds with disease clusters, or clinically from self-report. The population prevalence of individuals with diagnostic characteristics and/or family cancer history meeting criteria for HBOC testing is unknown. METHODS: Utilizing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data and a research resource linking registry records to genealogies, the Utah Population Database, the population-based prevalence of diagnostic and family history characteristics meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for HBOC testing was objectively assessed. RESULTS: Among Utah residents with an incident breast cancer diagnosis 2010-2015 and evaluable for family history, 21.6% met criteria for testing based on diagnostic characteristics, but the proportion increased to 62.9% when family history was evaluated. The proportion of cases meeting testing criteria at diagnosis was 94% for ovarian cancer, 23% for prostate cancer, and 51.1% for pancreatic cancer. Among an unaffected Utah population of approximately 1.7 million evaluable for family history, 197,601 or 11.6% met testing criteria based on family history. CONCLUSIONS: This study quantifies the population-based prevalence of HBOC criteria using objectively determined genealogy and cancer incidence data. Sporadic breast cancer likely represents a portion of the high prevalence of family cancer history seen in this study. These results underline the importance of establishing presence of a deleterious mutation in an affected family member, per NCCN guidelines, before testing unaffected relatives.

Comparison of Somatic and Germline Variant Interpretation in Hereditary Cancer Genes.

PURPOSE: To compare the classification of genetic variants reported on tumor genomic profiling (TGP) reports with germline classifications on clinical test results and ClinVar. Results will help to inform germline testing discussions and decisions in patients with tumor variants in genes that are relevant to hereditary cancer risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study compared somatic and germline classifications of small nucleotide variants in the following genes: BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, PALB2, ATM, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. Somatic classifications were taken from reports from a single commercial TGP laboratory of tests ordered by providers at Huntsman Cancer Institute between March 2014 and June 2018. Somatic variant interpretations were compared with classifications from germline test results as well as with ClinVar interpretations. RESULTS: Of the 623 variants identified on TGP, 353 had a definitive classification in ClinVar, and 103 were assayed with a germline test, with 66 of the variants tested observed in germline. Analysis of somatic variants of uncertain significance listed on TGP reports determined that 22% had a different interpretation compared with ClinVar and that 32% differed from the interpretation on a germline test result. Pathogenic variants on TGP test results were found to differ 13% and 5% of the time compared with ClinVar interpretations and germline test results, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that TGP variants are often classified differently in a germline context. Differences may be due to different processes in variant interpretation between somatic and germline laboratories. These results are important for health care providers to consider when making decisions about additional testing for hereditary cancer risks.

Improving Health Education for Women Who Carry an FMR1 Premutation.

Women who carry an FMR1 (i.e., fragile X) premutation have specific health risks over their lifetime. However, little is known about their experience understanding these risks and navigating their health needs. The aim of this study was to use qualitative analysis to uncover both barriers and facilitators to personal healthcare using a framework of the Health Belief Model. Five focus groups were conducted with a total of 20 women who carry the FMR1 premutation using a semi-structured discussion guide. All sessions were transcribed verbatim and independently coded by two researchers. The coders used a deductive - inductive approach to determine the prominent themes related to the participants' experiences seeking healthcare for premutation-related conditions. Salient barriers to personal healthcare included difficult clinical translation of research findings, lack of knowledge among healthcare providers and among the women themselves, different priorities, and shortage of premutation-specific support and targeted educational materials. Facilitators included family members, national and community support organizations, research studies, compassionate physicians, and other premutation carriers. Addressing barriers to personal healthcare through up-to-date educational materials can help diminish misperceptions regarding health risks. Targeted educational materials will aid in information sharing and awareness for women who carry the FMR1 premutation and their physicians.

Approaches to identify genetic variants that influence the risk for onset of fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI): a preliminary study.

Fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency (FXPOI) is due to an X-linked mutation that results from the expansion of a CGG repeat sequence located in the 5' untranslated region of the FMR1 gene (premutation, PM). About 20% of women who carry the PM have cessation of menses before age 40, a clinical condition known as premature ovarian failure (POF). This leads to a 20-fold increased risk over women in the general population. Thus, this single gene mutation has a major effect on reducing a woman's reproductive life span. Based on survival analysis of about 1300 women, we showed that the mean age at menopause among PM carriers is reduced compared with noncarriers, even after removing women who reported POF. This suggests that the majority of women with the PM, not just a subset, experience ovarian insufficiency earlier than noncarriers. To better understand the underlying mechanism of the PM and to identify genes that modify the variable expressivity of FXPOI, we conducted two pilot studies. The first focused on five common variants known to reduce age at menopause. We genotyped these SNPs in 72 women with a PM who experienced menopause and found a significant association with the total SNP risk burden and age at menopause. This suggests that these SNPs influence onset of FXPOI, after adjusting for the effect of the PM allele. In the second approach, we conducted whole genome sequencing on 10 PM carriers, five with onset of FXPOI prior to age 30 and five who experienced menopause after age 47 years. Although only a pilot study, we describe our preliminary approach to identify potential variants that may play a role in modifying onset of FXPOI and potentially play a role in idiopathic primary ovarian insufficiency. The overarching goal of both approaches is to identify predictor variants that may identify women predisposed to early onset FXPOI and to further identify genes involved in defining a woman's reproductive life span.