Information Topics of Greatest Interest for Return of Genome Sequencing Results among Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer at a Young Age.

We investigated what information women diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age would want to learn when genome sequencing results are returned. We conducted 60 semi-structured interviews with women diagnosed with breast cancer at age 40 or younger. We examined what specific information participants would want to learn across result types and for each type of result, as well as how much information they would want. Genome sequencing was not offered to participants as part of the study. Two coders independently coded interview transcripts; analysis was conducted using NVivo10. Across result types, participants wanted to learn about health implications, risk and prevalence in quantitative terms, causes of variants, and causes of diseases. Participants wanted to learn actionable information for variants affecting risk of preventable or treatable disease, medication response, and carrier status. The amount of desired information differed for variants affecting risk of unpreventable or untreatable disease, with uncertain significance, and not health-related. Women diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age recognize the value of genome sequencing results in identifying potential causes and effective treatments and expressed interest in using the information to help relatives and to further understand their other health risks. Our findings can inform the development of effective feedback strategies for genome sequencing that meet patients' information needs and preferences.

Development of Plain Language Supplemental Materials for the Biobank Informed Consent Process.

The US Department of Health and Human Services addresses clear communication in the informed consent process as part of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for revisions to the Common Rule. However, prior research has shown that participants may not fully comprehend research studies despite completion of an informed consent process. Our main goal was to provide plain language information about donation processes to a cancer biobank to supplement an informed consent form. We developed and conducted cognitive testing with supplemental brochures that clearly communicated information about three different models for consent (notice, broad and study-specific) to future use of biospecimens. During the brochure development process, we conducted qualitative, semi-structured, individual, in-person cognitive interviews among 14 women to examine participants' perceptions of the brochures. Each participant provided feedback regarding the understandability, graphics and layout, and cultural appropriateness of the brochures. Our findings demonstrate that these methods may be used to tailor consent form brochures, such as the ones developed here, to other populations. This study therefore adds to our understanding of how best to present content to help women from two different racial groups make informed decisions about participation in a cancer biobank.

Effect of Health Literacy on Decision-Making Preferences among Medically Underserved Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Participation in the decision-making process and health literacy may both affect health outcomes; data on how these factors are related among diverse groups are limited. This study examined the relationship between health literacy and decision-making preferences in a medically underserved population. METHODS: We analyzed a sample of 576 primary care patients. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of health literacy (measured by the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Revised) and patients' decision-making preferences (physician directed or patient involved), controlling for age, race/ethnicity, and gender. We tested whether having a regular doctor modified this association. RESULTS: Adequate health literacy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.7;P= 0.009) was significantly associated with preferring patient-involved decision making, controlling for age, race/ethnicity, and gender. Having a regular doctor did not modify this relationship. Males were significantly less likely to prefer patient-involved decision making (OR = 0.65;P= 0.024). DISCUSSION: Findings suggest health literacy affects decision-making preferences in medically underserved patients. More research is needed on how factors, such as patient knowledge or confidence, may influence decision-making preferences, particularly for those with limited health literacy.

Differences in preferences for models of consent for biobanks between Black and White women.

Biobanks are essential resources, and participation by individuals from diverse groups is needed. Various models of consent have been proposed for secondary research use of biospecimens, differing in level of donor control and information received. Data are needed regarding participant preferences for models of consent, particularly among minorities. We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 60 women to examine their attitudes about different models of consent. Recruitment was stratified by race (Black/White) and prior biobank participation (yes/no). Two coders independently coded interview transcripts. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 10. The majority of Black and White participants preferred "broad" consent (i.e., blanket permission for secondary research use of biospecimens), and the second most preferred model for both groups was "study-specific" consent (i.e., consent for each future research study). The qualitative analysis showed that participants selected their most preferred model for 3 major reasons: having enough information, having control over their sample, and being asked for permission. Least preferred was notice model (i.e., participants notified that biospecimens may be used in future research). Attitudes toward models of consent differed somewhat by race and prior biobank participation. Participants preferred models of consent for secondary research use of biospecimens that provided them with both specific and general information, control over their biospecimens, and asked them to give permission for use. Our findings suggest that it will be important for researchers to provide information about future uses of biospecimens to the extent possible and have an explicit permission step for secondary research use.

The context of collecting family health history: examining definitions of family and family communication about health among African American women.

Public health initiatives encourage the public to discuss and record family health history information, which can inform prevention and screening for a variety of conditions. Most research on family health history discussion and collection, however, has predominantly involved White participants and has not considered lay definitions of family or family communication patterns about health. This qualitative study of 32 African American women-16 with a history of cancer-analyzed participants' definitions of family, family communication about health, and collection of family health history information. Family was defined by biological relatedness, social ties, interactions, and proximity. Several participants noted using different definitions of family for different purposes (e.g., biomedical vs. social). Health discussions took place between and within generations and were influenced by structural relationships (e.g., sister) and characteristics of family members (e.g., trustworthiness). Participants described managing tensions between sharing health information and protecting privacy, especially related to generational differences in sharing information, fear of familial conflict or gossip, and denial (sometimes described as refusal to "own" or "claim" a disease). Few participants reported that anyone in their family kept formal family health history records. Results suggest family health history initiatives should address family tensions and communication patterns that affect discussion and collection of family health history information.

Effects of racial and ethnic group and health literacy on responses to genomic risk information in a medically underserved population.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined how individuals respond to genomic risk information for common, chronic diseases. This randomized study examined differences in responses by type of genomic information (genetic test/family history) and disease condition (diabetes/heart disease), and by race/ethnicity in a medically underserved population. METHODS: 1,057 English-speaking adults completed a survey containing 1 of 4 vignettes (2-by-2 randomized design). Differences in dependent variables (i.e., interest in receiving genomic assessment, discussing with doctor or family, changing health habits) by experimental condition and race/ethnicity were examined using chi-squared tests and multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in dependent variables by type of genomic information or disease condition. In multivariable models, Hispanics were more interested in receiving a genomic assessment than Whites (OR = 1.93; p < .0001); respondents with marginal (OR = 1.54; p = .005) or limited (OR = 1.85; p = .009) health literacy had greater interest than those with adequate health literacy. Blacks (OR = 1.78; p = .001) and Hispanics (OR = 1.85; p = .001) had greater interest in discussing information with family than Whites. Non-Hispanic Blacks (OR = 1.45; p = .04) had greater interest in discussing genomic information with a doctor than Whites. Blacks (ß = -0.41; p < .001) and Hispanics (ß = -0.25; p = .033) intended to change fewer health habits than Whites; health literacy was negatively associated with number of health habits participants intended to change. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that race/ethnicity may affect responses to genomic risk information. Additional research could examine how cognitive representations of this information differ across racial/ethnic groups. Health literacy is also critical to consider in developing approaches to communicating genomic information.

"You don't have to keep everything on paper": African American women's use of family health history tools.

Little is known about African American women's collection of family health history (FHH) information and use of FHH tools. Most FHH research has investigated tools that use a biomedical paradigm, but other kinds of tools, such as those that include information about family social context, have been developed for use in diverse populations. Using mixed methods, we interviewed 32 African American women about behavioral steps to collecting FHH, family communication about health, and reactions to a biomedical FHH tool. Participants chose one of two FHH tools to take home. A follow-up call three weeks later assessed tool use. Many participants expressed support for writing down FHH information, but at baseline few had done so; most participants who had collected FHH information had done so verbally. Participants reacted positively to the biomedical FHH tool used during the interview, with many saying it allowed them to see patterns in their FHH. At follow-up, 67 % reported using their FHH tool, primarily to promote discussion among family members; only 32 % used the tool to write down FHH information. Although participants thought collecting FHH information was important and had positive reactions to both tools, the majority did not use the tools to write down information and instead collected FHH informally. These findings underline the importance of separating the components of FHH collection behaviors to analyze the steps used in FHH creation. Practitioners should consider additional methods of encouraging patients to create written FHHs in order to share the information with health care providers.

Veterans' experience in using the online Surgeon General's family health history tool.

AIM: To assess veterans' experience and satisfaction in using the Surgeon General's (SG) online family health history (FHH) tool, and determine the perceived facilitators and barriers to using the online SG-FHH tool. MATERIALS #ENTITYSTARTX00026; METHODS: A mixed-method using both qualitative and quantitative approaches was employed in this study. A total of 35 veterans at the VA Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas, USA were invited to enter their FHH information using the online SG-FHH tool, complete the study's satisfaction survey and participate in a short semi-structured interview. The goal of the semi-structured interviews was to assess participants perceived facilitators and barriers to using the online SG-FHH tool. All participants were also provided with a printed copy of their pedigree, which was generated by the SG-FHH tool and were encouraged to share it with their relatives and providers. RESULTS: The majority of participants (91%) said that they had access to a computer with internet capability and 77% reported that they knew how to use a computer. More than two-thirds of the participants felt that items on the SG-FHH tool were easy to read and felt that FHH categories were relevant to their family's health. Approximately 94% of participants viewed the SG-FHH tool as useful, and the majority of participants (97%) indicated that they were likely to recommend the tool to others. Content analysis of the semi-structured interviews highlighted several barriers to veterans' use of the SG-FHH tool and their FHH information. These included: lack of patients' knowledge regarding their relatives' FHH, and privacy and confidentiality concerns. CONCLUSION: This study provides information on the performance and functionality of an inexpensive and widely accessible method for FHH collection. Furthermore, our findings highlight several opportunities and challenges facing the utilization of FHH information as a clinical and genomic tool at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The results suggest that strategies that improve veterans' knowledge regarding the importance of their FHH information and that address their concerns about privacy and confidentiality may enhance the successful implementation of FHH information into VHA clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS: identifying a locally accepted method for FHH collection and documentation which can be conducted outside of the patient visit will reduce time burdens for providers and patients and allow for a focus on other important topics during clinic visits. Improvement in familial risk screening and assessment will enable the VHA to be prepared for personalized medicine and focus their resources on promoting critically important health behaviors for populations with the highest risk of developing chronic diseases and their complications.

Providers' behavioral beliefs regarding the delivery of genomic medicine at the Veterans Health Administration.

AIMS: To examine providers' behavioral intention toward the utilization of genomic services at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA; Washington, DC, USA) through the lens of the 'Theory of Planned Behavior'. The theory of planned behavior posits that individuals' behaviors (using genomic services) are driven by their behavioral intentions. Behavioral intentions is a function of: first, behavioral beliefs; second, normative beliefs, and third; control beliefs. MATERIALS & METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 providers working in different units at the South Texas Veterans Health Care System (STVHCS; TX USA). The interviews focused on assessing providers' behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs and control beliefs regarding the delivery of genomic medicine at the STVHCS. Interview materials were tape recorded, transcribed and the content was analyzed using qualitative methods. RESULTS: All participating providers perceived genomic medicine to be an important area in medicine (behavioral beliefs). They agreed that the VHA has the necessary infrastructure to foster the delivery of genomic services. The majority of participants (n = 18; 90%) agreed that primary care providers will play a major role in delivering genomic services. Providers indicated that referents' (other providers) opinions about genomic services may affect their decisions about whether to utilize genomic services (normative beliefs). However, most providers (n = 17; 85%) raised concerns about the impact of using genomic services on the process of care (control beliefs). Participants indicated that additional training for providers and patients, and decision support will facilitate the delivery of genomic services (control beliefs). Providers also identified three external barriers: first, uncertainty about genomic findings; second, coordination of care between primary care, specialists and genetic services (system level barriers); and third ethical issues associated with genomic information and services. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight several opportunities and challenges related to the delivery of genomic medicine at the VHA. The results suggest that strategies to address providers' concerns in the control beliefs domain may be necessary to enhance providers' utilization of genomic services in clinical practice.