Parental Understanding of Their Child's Germline Genomic Testing: Intent of Disclosure to Their Child and Family.

Genomic testing is becoming increasingly common in the care of pediatric patients with cancer. Parental understanding of germline results and their intent and timing of results disclosure to their child and family may have significant implications on the family unit. The purpose of this study was to examine parental understanding of germline genomic results and plans for disclosure to their child and other relatives. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 64 parents of children with cancer, approximately eight weeks after parents had received their child's results. Parents of children with negative results (n = 20), positive results (n = 15), or variants of uncertain significance (n = 29), were interviewed. Fifty-three parents (83%) correctly identified their child's results as negative, uncertain, or positive. Most parents had disclosed results to family members; however, only 11 parents (17%) acknowledged discussing results with their child. Most parents delayed disclosure due to the young age of their child at the time of testing. In summary, most parents appropriately described their child's germline genomic results, yet few discussed the results with their child due to age. Families should be followed with supportive counseling to assist parents in the timing and content of result disclosure to their children.

Parent Quality of Life After Disclosure of Pediatric Oncology Germline Sequencing Results.

PURPOSE: To characterize parents' quality of life (QoL) after germline genomic sequencing for their children with cancer. METHODS: Participants were n = 104 parents of children with cancer enrolled in a prospective study of clinical tumor and germline genomic sequencing. Parents completed surveys at study consent (T0), before disclosure of their child's germline results (T1), and again ≥5 weeks after results disclosure (T2). Bivariate associations with QoL were examined, followed by a multivariable regression model predicting parents' psychological distress. RESULTS: At T2, parental distress significantly differed by their children's germline result type (positive, uncertain, negative; P = .038), parent relationship status (P = .04), predisclosure genetics knowledge (P = .006), and predisclosure worry about sequencing (P < .001). Specifically, parents of children with positive (ie, pathogenic or likely pathogenic) results experienced greater distress than those of children with negative results (P = .029), as did parents who were single, more knowledgeable about genetics, and with greater worry. In the adjusted regression model, a positive germline result remained significantly associated with parents' lower QoL at T2 follow-up (F [4,92] = 9.95; P < .001; R2 = .30; ß = .19; P = .031). CONCLUSION: Germline genomic sequencing for children with cancer is associated with distress among parents when revealing an underlying cancer predisposition among their affected children. Genetic education and counseling before and after germline sequencing may help attenuate this impact on QoL by addressing parents' concerns about test results and their health implications. Assessing parents' worry early in the testing process may also aid in identifying those most likely in need of psychosocial support.

Antiracism: An Ethical Imperative.

Pediatric ethicists hold a privileged position of influence within health care institutions. Such a position confers a corresponding responsibility to address barriers to the health and flourishing of all children. A major barrier to children's health is racism. Pediatric ethicists can, and should, leverage their position to address racism both in institutional policy and the provision of pediatric care. Health care's historical and continued contributions to fostering and sustaining racist values and systems mean that those within all medical fields- regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, age, or profession-should consider ways they can work to offset and ultimately dismantle those values and systems. Institutional policy is a critical mechanism propagating racism in hospitals and an area where ethicists have a unique perspective to bring antiracism into ethical analysis. Many institutional and organizational policies have unintended consequences, negatively impacting children and families who have been historically marginalized and oppressed. In this paper, we report and discuss existing policies, along with how they are implemented (procedures) and how they are conducted (practices), identified through a workshop during a pediatric subgroup meeting at an annual bioethics conference. We highlight the need to focus on these structural factors and reference scholarship that can be used to correct institutional policies that uphold white supremacy. We conclude with actionable, concrete recommendations for change.

Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccine among pediatric patients with sickle cell disease and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate attitudes toward vaccination and vaccine uptake regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among pediatric patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) and their caregivers. PROCEDURE: Adolescent patients and caregivers of children with SCD were surveyed during routine clinic visits; we then conducted a logistic regression analysis to understand differences in vaccine status, while qualitative responses were coded thematically. RESULTS: Among respondents, the overall vaccination rate among adolescents and caregivers was 49% and 52%, respectively. Among the unvaccinated, 60% and 68% of adolescents and caregivers, respectively, preferred to remain unvaccinated, most commonly due to lack of perceived personal benefit from vaccination or mistrust in the vaccine. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that child's age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0-1.2, p < .01) and caregiver education (measured by the Economic Hardship Index [EHI] score, OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.74-0.78, p < .05) were independent predictors of getting vaccinated. CONCLUSION: Despite the increased risk of severe illness due to COVID-19 in patients with SCD, vaccine hesitancy remains high in this population of families whose children have SCD. Fortunately, the reasons cited for deferring vaccination among those who are unvaccinated were largely due to barriers that may be overcome with quality communication around the utility of the vaccine and information about vaccine safety.

Gene therapy in sickle cell disease: Attitudes and informational needs of patients and caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited blood disorder that results in serious morbidity and early mortality. Novel therapies for SCD, most notably genetic therapies (GTs) and HLA-mismatched donor hematopoietic cell transplantation, are in clinical trials. While potentially curative, these interventions are some of the most intensive treatments for SCD and are associated with serious and life-altering side effects, which may manifest several years after treatment. Little is known about knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of individuals with SCD, or their caregivers, toward existing and these emerging therapies. METHODS: Patients with SCD at least 13 years of age (n = 66) and caregivers (n = 38) were surveyed about knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs surrounding treatments for SCD. RESULTS: Only 4.8% felt "extremely knowledgeable" about GT for SCD while the majority (63.4%) reported little knowledge. Overall, health literacy was low among respondents. Most respondents had a neutral attitude regarding the safety of GT for SCD, and whether it was a good treatment for the disorder (56.7% and 58.6%, respectively). Only a few respondents endorsed the idea that GT was "unsafe" or "not a good treatment" (5.8% and 4.8%, respectively). There was an association between increasing knowledge about GT and agreement that it is safe (p = .012) and a good treatment for SCD (p = .031). CONCLUSIONS: Given that very few patients with SCD feel knowledgeable about GT and a majority have neutral feelings about the safety and utility of this new approach, culturally appropriate patient-centered education is urgently needed as these treatments get regulatory approval and proceed to the clinic.

The role of ethicists in pediatric hematology/oncology: Current status and future needs.

As pediatric hematology/oncology (PHO) becomes more complex and sub-subspecialized, dedicated PHO ethicists have emerged as sub-subspecialists focused on addressing ethical issues encountered in clinical and research practices. PHO physicians and other clinicians with advanced training in bioethics contribute to the field through ethics research, education, and ethics consultation services. Furthermore, there exists a newer generation of PHO trainees interested in bioethics. This review details the experiences of current PHO ethicists, providing a blueprint for future educational, research and service activities to strengthen the trajectory of the burgeoning sub-subspecialty of PHO ethics. Creating an American Society of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology (ASPHO) ethics Special Interest Group, enhancing clinical ethics education for pediatric hematologists/oncologists (PHOs), developing multi-institutional research collaborations, and increasing attention to ethical issues germane to nonmalignant hematology will serve the interests of the entire field of PHO, enhancing the care of PHO patients and careers of PHOs.

Dexmedetomidine and Propofol at End of Life in Pediatric Oncology: Trends in Palliative Sedation Therapy.

Context: Palliative sedation therapy (PST) can address suffering at the end of life (EOL) in children with cancer; yet, little is known about PST in this population. Objectives: We sought to describe the characteristics of pediatric oncology patients requiring PST at the EOL. Methods: A retrospective review was completed for pediatric oncology patients who required PST at a United States academic institution over 10 years, including demographics, disease characteristics, EOL characteristics, and medications for PST and symptom management. Results: PST was utilized in 3% of patients at the EOL. Of 24 study participants receiving PST, 83% (n = 20), 12.5% (n = 3), and 4.2% (n = 1) received dexmedetomidine, propofol, or both, respectively. The most frequent diagnosis for patients receiving PST was acute myelogenous leukemia (20.8%, n = 5). All patients were followed up by the palliative care team, and two-thirds (66.6%, n = 16) were also followed up by the pain management service; 79% (n = 19) were enrolled in hospice, and 98.5% (n = 23) had a Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment in place. Pain was the most common refractory symptom leading to PST initiation (33.3%, n = 8), followed by neuroagitation and dyspnea. PST was initiated a median of 2.5 days before death. A third of deaths occurred in the intensive care unit (33.3%, n = 8). Conclusions: PST was rare in this study; dexmedetomidine was used as first-line treatment for PST in patients at the EOL with refractory symptoms. Its place in PST protocols in pediatric oncology should be validated with prospective studies. Our study suggests the potential value of collaboration between palliative care and pain specialists in the context of PST.

Palliative Sedation Therapy in Pediatrics: An Algorithm and Clinical Practice Update.

Palliative sedation therapy (PST) is an important clinical intervention for pediatric patients with refractory symptoms and suffering during the end-of-life (EOL) period. Variations in PST implementation including medication selection, limited literature regarding feasibility in various clinical settings, particularly non-intensive care units, and lack of education on evolving definitions and ideal practices may all contribute to the current underutilization of this valuable resource. We therefore offer a clinical algorithm for identifying appropriate patients for PST, ensuring all other modalities for symptom management have been considered and/or optimized, and present a guideline for PST implementation that can be adapted and individualized based on institutional experience and resource availability. Furthermore, through case-based clinical scenarios, we demonstrate how to incorporate this algorithm into EOL practice.

Parental Preferences Surrounding Timing and Content of Consent Conversations for Clinical Germline Genetic Testing Following a Child's New Cancer Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Clinical genomic testing is increasingly being used to direct pediatric cancer care. Many centers are interested in offering testing of tumors and paired germline tissues at or near the time of cancer diagnosis. We conducted this study to better understand parent preferences surrounding timing and content of consent conversations for clinical germline genetic testing of their children with cancer as a part of real-time cancer care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A seven-question survey developed by the Division of Cancer Predisposition and collaborators at St Jude Children's Research Hospital (St Jude) was distributed to members of the St Jude Patient Family Advisory Council, which included parents of childhood cancer survivors and bereaved parents whose children with cancer had died. Parents were asked to provide free text comments after each question. Qualitative methods were used to derive codes from parent comments, and survey results were depicted using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 172 parents. Ninety-three (54%) endorsed an approach for consent conversations ≥ 1 month after cancer diagnosis, whereas 58 (34%) endorsed an approach at 1-2 weeks and 21 (12%) at 1-2 days. Needing time to adjust to a new or relapsed cancer diagnosis and feeling overwhelmed were frequent themes; however, parents acknowledged the urgency and importance of testing. Parents desired testing of as many cancer-related genes as possible, with clinical utility the most important factor for proceeding with testing. Most parents (75%) desired germline results to be disclosed in person, preferably by a genetic counselor. CONCLUSION: Parents described urgency and benefits associated with germline testing, but desired flexibility in timing to allow for initial adjustment after their child's cancer diagnosis.

Improving Blood Product Transfusion Premedication Plan Documentation: A Single-institution Quality Improvement Effort.

Introduction: Premedication with acetaminophen and/or diphenhydramine to prevent febrile nonhemolytic transfusion reactions and minor allergic transfusion reactions is a common practice based on historical recommendations. However, recent small randomized-controlled trials showed no benefit of premedication. This inconsistency leads to practice variability, which results in the inefficiency of our institution's blood product ordering process. This project aimed to improve the number of transfusion encounters with premedication plan documentation from a baseline of 19% to 80% in 12 months. Methods: A multidisciplinary quality improvement (QI) team used QI tools to design interventions to improve the efficiency of the ordering process for blood products. Measures were tracked monthly and analyzed using statistical process control. Results: From September 2018 to January 2021, 5,351 blood product transfusion visits were scheduled. At baseline, 34% of patients received premedication, and 19% had premedication plans documented. Interventions included a passive computerized provider order entry alert, clinical care pathway development, and clinician education. Postimplementation, the average number of encounters with a premedication plan increased from 19% to 87%, whereas encounters receiving premedication decreased from 34% to 25%. There was no change in the average number of transfusion reactions (1.8 per 100 transfusions). Conclusions: Using QI methods, our team successfully standardized the blood product premedication plan documentation despite unclear best practices regarding blood product transfusion premedication. The team added premedication plan documentation training to new employee orientation for sustainability.

Managing Pandora's Box: Familial Expectations around the Return of (Future) Germline Results.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric oncology patients are increasingly being offered germline testing to diagnose underlying cancer predispositions. Meanwhile, as understanding of variant pathogenicity evolves, planned reanalysis of genomic results has been suggested. Little is known regarding the types of genomic information that parents and their adolescent children with cancer prefer to receive at the time of testing or their expectations around the future return of genomic results. METHODS: Parents and adolescent children with cancer eligible for genomic testing for cancer predisposition were surveyed regarding their attitudes and expectations for receiving current and future germline results (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02530658). RESULTS: All parents (100%) desired to learn about results for treatable or preventable conditions, with 92.4% wanting results even when there is no treatment or prevention. Parents expressed less interest in receiving uncertain results for themselves (88.3%) than for their children (95.3%). Most parents (95.9%) and adolescents (87.9%) believed that providers have a responsibility to share new or updated germline results indefinitely or at any point during follow-up care. Fewer parents (67.5%) indicated that they would want results if their child was deceased: 10.3% would not want to be contacted, 19.3% were uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Expectations for return of new or updated genomic results are high among pediatric oncology families, although up to one third of parents have reservations about receiving such information in the event of their child's death. These results underscore the importance of high-quality pre-and post-test counseling, conducted by individuals trained in consenting around genomic testing to elicit family preferences and align expectations around the return of germline results.