Protocol for Health Risk Information Technology-Assisted Genetic Evaluation (HeRITAGE): a randomised controlled trial of digital genetic cancer risk assessment in a diverse underserved gynaecology clinic.

INTRODUCTION: In the USA, up to 95% of individuals harbouring cancer-predisposing germline pathogenic variants have not been identified despite recommendations for screening at the primary care level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our primary objective is to use a two-arm, single-institution randomised controlled trial to compare the proportion of eligible patients that are recommended genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes using a digital tool versus clinician interview for genetic cancer risk assessment in an urban academic gynaecology clinic. New gynaecology patients will be consented and randomised 1:1 to either the intervention arm, in which a digital tool is used for genetic cancer risk assessment, or usual care, in which the clinician performs genetic cancer risk assessment. Individuals will be considered eligible for hereditary cancer syndrome genetic testing if criteria set forth by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology are met. Eligible patients are 18 years or older, speak and read English, have not yet undergone hereditary cancer genetic testing and have access to a smartphone. The study aims to enrol 50 patients in each arm to allow for 80% power with two-tailed alpha of 5% to detect a 20% difference in proportion of eligible patients recommended for genetic testing. The primary outcome is the proportion of eligible individuals recommended genetic testing in the digital tool arm versus usual care arm, analysed using the χ2 or Fisher's exact test as appropriate for sample size. The secondary outcome is completion of genetic testing, as well as exploration of patient factors, particularly social determinants of health, which may affect the receipt, utilisation and experience with genetic services. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Weill Cornell Institutional Review Board (Protocol No. 21-11024123). Participants will be informed of the benefits and risks of participation prior to consent. Dissemination of data will be deidentified and conducted through academic conferences and journals. Patients identified to be eligible for genetic testing who did not receive counselling from their providers will be contacted; participants will not receive direct notification of trial results. REGISTRATION DETAILS: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05562778) in September 2022. PROTOCOL VERSION: This is protocol version 1, as of 22 May 2024. COUNTRIES OF RECRUITMENT AND RECRUITMENT STATUS: USA, currently recruiting. HEALTH CONDITIONS/PROBLEMS STUDIED: Genetic predisposition to cancers such as breast, ovarian, uterine and pancreatic. DEIDENTIFIED INDIVIDUAL CLINICAL TRIAL PARTICIPANT-LEVEL DATA IDP SHARING STATEMENT: IDP will not be shared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05562778.

Association of electrocardiogram findings with clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome: an analysis of the ISCHEMIA trials.

AIMS: We aimed to investigate the association of electrocardiogram (ECG) findings with outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. METHODS: This secondary analysis of the ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-CKD trials divided patients with chronic coronary syndrome into two groups, those with a normal ECG tracing and abnormal ECG tracing. Repolarization abnormalities included ST-segment depression ≥0.5mm and T-wave inversion ≥1mm; conduction abnormalities included left and right bundle branch block (LBBB and RBBB). The primary endpoint was cardiovascular death. Outcomes were assessed using a covariate-adjusted Cox-regression model. RESULTS: Of 5876 patients, 2901 (49.4%) had a normal and 2975 (50.6%) an abnormal ECG tracing. An abnormal ECG tracing at baseline, compared with normal ECG, was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death (257 of 2975 [8.6%] vs 97 of 2901 [3.3%], adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.01, 95%CI 1.58-2.55) over a median follow-up period of 3.1 years [IQR 2.1-4.2]. This finding was consistent across subgroups except for patients with black skin color and current smokers, in whom an abnormal ECG was not significantly associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death. Individual ECG abnormalities (ST-segment depression [aHR 2.0, 95%CI 1.52-2.63], T-wave inversion [aHR 1.89, 95%CI 1.40-2.54], LBBB [aHR 1.74, 95%CI 1.05-2.90], and RBBB [aHR 1.52, 95%CI 1.04-2.22],) were independently associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic coronary syndrome, an abnormal ECG tracing was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death. Our findings underscore the importance of the ECG in cardiovascular risk stratification and prognostication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01471522, BioLINCC ID 14539.

Patient perspectives on risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy for ovarian cancer risk-reduction: A systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Increasing evidence suggests the fallopian tube as the site of origin of BRCA1/2-associated high-grade ovarian cancers. Several ongoing trials are evaluating salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRSDO) for ovarian cancer risk reduction and patients are beginning to ask their clinicians about this surgical option. This study sought to systematically review the available literature examining patient preferences regarding RRSDO and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) to provide clinicians with an understanding of patient values, concerns, and priorities surrounding ovarian cancer risk-reducing surgery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO No.: CRD42023400690). We searched key electronic databases to identify studies evaluating acceptance and surgical decision-making regarding RRSO and RRSDO among patients with an increased risk of ovarian cancer. RESULTS: The search yielded 239 results, among which six publications met the systematic review inclusion criteria. Acceptance of RRSDO was evaluated in all studies and ranged from 34% to 71%. Factors positively impacting patients' acceptance of RRSDO included: avoidance of surgical menopause, preservation of fertility, concerns about sexual dysfunction, family history of breast cancer, and avoidance of hormone replacement therapy. Factors limiting this acceptance reported by patients included concerns regarding oncologic safety, surgical timing, and surgical complications. CONCLUSION: To date, few studies have explored patient perspectives surrounding RRSDO. Collectively, the limited data available indicate a high level of acceptance among BRCA1/2 carriers, and provides insight regarding both facilitating and limiting factors associated with patient preferences to better equip clinicians in the counseling and support of their patients.