Applying the practice-based competencies to evaluate and characterize the contracting process within genetic counseling sessions.

Contracting is a skill used by genetic counselors (GCs) to establish a shared vision for the session. Ensuring that patients and GCs are aligned on expectations for the encounter allows GCs to meet patient needs and support patient autonomy. Although contracting is described in the practice-based competencies (PBCs), the process has not been systematically observed in practice. We sought to further elucidate the skills used for contracting within genetic counseling sessions through directed content analysis of transcripts from 148 simulated prenatal and cancer genetic counseling sessions. An a priori codebook and rating scale were developed based on four contracting sample skills described in the PBCs: (a) describing the genetic counseling process, (b) eliciting client concerns, (c) applying client concerns to a session agenda, (d) modifying the agenda in response to emerging concerns. The rating scale described the quality of each skill on a 4-point scale of "absent," "minimal," "adequate," and "excellent." The codebook and rating scale were pilot tested with 40% of transcripts (n = 60). Three authors independently coded and rated the final 60% of transcripts (n = 88), resolving discrepancies via a consensus process. We found that the four PBC skills were present in most sessions (88%-98%), and on average, GCs received "adequate" scores on all four skills. We also identified three additional components of contracting not described in the PBCs: assessing whether client concerns were met, inviting to interrupt, and providing opportunity for partner concerns. This study represents the first attempt to evaluate GC performance of a PBC during a genetic counseling session. Our findings demonstrate that the PBC sample contracting skills reflect practice and suggest that they can be used in assessment of the genetic counseling contracting process. This type of analysis could be adapted in the future to provide support for other standards of practice in the genetic counseling field.

Communication About Negative and Uncertain Results: Interactional Dilemmas During a Genetic Telehealth Consult.

This case study focuses on a video telehealth consult to discuss genetic testing results. Participants include a Genetic Counselor (GC) and a Patient (P) previously diagnosed with ovarian cancer who is currently undergoing chemotherapy treatments. Utilizing conversation analysis (CA), attention is first given to a series of interactional dilemmas as GC delivers and P responds to negative, uncertain, and complex test results. Specific findings address practices employed by GC to structure the encounter and establish authority, impacts on P's participation and understandings, recurring and at times problematic orientations to "negative" findings, and inherent ambiguities faced by GC and P when attempting to discern good and bad news. Close examination of these moments provides a unique opportunity to identify, describe, and explain genetic counseling as a co-produced, interactional achievement. These findings are then integrated with patient's post-counseling survey (susceptibility, anxiety, uncertainty, fear, and hope), including reported experiences which broaden understandings of the interactional environment. Specific recommendations are raised for improving counseling skills, enhancing patients' understandings, and building therapeutic alliances addressing both patients' emotional circumstances and the complexities of genetic test results.

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 .

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.

Female family members lack understanding of indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results shared by probands.

Genetic test results have important implications for close family members. Indeterminate negative results are the most common outcome of BRCA1/2 mutation testing. Little is known about family members' understanding of indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to investigate how daughters and sisters received and understood genetic test results as shared by their mothers or sisters. Participants included 81 women aged 40-74 with mothers or sisters previously diagnosed with breast cancer and who received indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results. Participants had never been diagnosed with breast cancer nor received their own genetic testing or counseling. This Institutional Review Board-approved study utilized semi-structured interviews and surveys. Descriptive coding with theme development was used during qualitative analysis. Participants reported low amounts of information shared with them. Most women described test results as negative and incorrectly interpreted the test to mean there was no genetic component to the pattern of cancer in their families. Only seven of 81 women accurately described test results consistent with the meaning of an indeterminate negative. Our findings demonstrate that indeterminate negative genetic test results are not well understood by family members. Lack of understanding may lead to an inability to effectively communicate results to primary care providers and missed opportunities for prevention, screening, and further genetic testing. Future research should evaluate acceptability and feasibility of providing family members letters they can share with their own primary care providers.

Pancreatic cancer as a sentinel for hereditary cancer predisposition.

BACKGROUND: Genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) predisposition have been shown to play a role in pancreatic cancer susceptibility. Growing evidence suggests that pancreatic cancer may be useful as a sentinel cancer to identify families that could benefit from HBOC or CRC surveillance, but to date pancreatic cancer is only considered an indication for genetic testing in the context of additional family history. METHODS: Preliminary data generated at the Huntsman Cancer Hospital (HCH) included variants identified on a custom 34-gene panel or 59-gene panel including both known HBOC and CRC genes for respective sets of 66 and 147 pancreatic cancer cases, unselected for family history. Given the strength of preliminary data and corresponding literature, 61 sequential pancreatic cancer cases underwent a custom 14-gene clinical panel. Sequencing data from HCH pancreatic cancer cases, pancreatic cancer cases of the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), and an unselected pancreatic cancer screen from the Mayo Clinic were combined in a meta-analysis to estimate the proportion of carriers with pathogenic and high probability of pathogenic variants of uncertain significance (HiP-VUS). RESULTS: Approximately 8.6% of unselected pancreatic cancer cases at the HCH carried a variant with potential HBOC or CRC screening recommendations. A meta-analysis of unselected pancreatic cancer cases revealed that approximately 11.5% carry a pathogenic variant or HiP-VUS. CONCLUSION: With the inclusion of both HBOC and CRC susceptibility genes in a panel test, unselected pancreatic cancer cases act as a useful sentinel cancer to identify asymptomatic at-risk relatives who could benefit from relevant HBOC and CRC surveillance measures.

A study of over 35,000 women with breast cancer tested with a 25-gene panel of hereditary cancer genes.

BACKGROUND: As panel testing becomes more common in clinical practice, it is important to understand the prevalence and trends associated with the pathogenic variants (PVs) identified. This is especially true for genetically heterogeneous cancers, such as breast cancer (BC), in which PVs in different genes may be associated with various risks and cancer subtypes. The authors evaluated the outcomes of genetic testing among women who had a personal history of BC. METHODS: A total of 35,409 women with a single diagnosis of BC who underwent clinical genetic testing with a 25-gene panel were included in the current analysis. Women with multiple BCs and men with BC were excluded. The frequency and distribution of PVs were assessed for the overall cohort, among women with triple-negative BC (TNBC) (n = 4797), and by age at diagnosis. RESULTS: PVs were identified in 9.3% of women tested; 51.5% of PVs were identified in genes other than breast cancer 1 (BRCA1) and BRCA2, including checkpoint kinase 2 (CHEK2) (11.7%), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM; ATM serine/threonine kinase) (9.7%), and partner and localizer of BRCA2 (PALB2) (9.3%). The prevalence of PVs in BRCA1, PALB2, BRCA1-associated RING domain 1 (BARD1), BRCA1-interacting protein C-terminal helicase 1 (BRIP1), and RAD51 paralog C (RAD51C) was statistically higher among women with TNBC. The PV rate was higher among women aged <40 years, lower among women aged >59 years, and relatively constant (8.5%-9.0%) among women who were diagnosed between ages 40 and 59 years. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that panel testing increased the number of women identified as carrying a PV in this cohort compared with BRCA testing alone. Furthermore, the proportion of women identified who carried a PV in this cohort did not decrease between ages 40 and 59 years. Cancer 2017;123:1721-1730. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Factors Associated with Interest in Gene-Panel Testing and Risk Communication Preferences in Women from BRCA1/2 Negative Families.

Scientific advances have allowed the development of multiplex gene-panels to assess many genes simultaneously in women who have tested negative for BRCA1/2. We examined correlates of interest in testing for genes that confer modest and moderate breast cancer risk and risk communication preferences for women from BRCA negative families. Female first-degree relatives of breast cancer patients who tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations (N = 149) completed a survey assessing multiplex genetic testing interest and risk communication preferences. Interest in testing was high (70 %) and even higher if results could guide risk-reducing behavior changes such as taking medications (79 %). Participants preferred to receive genomic risk communications from a variety of sources including: primary care physicians (83 %), genetic counselors (78 %), printed materials (71 %) and the web (60 %). Factors that were independently associated with testing interest were: perceived lifetime risk of developing cancer (odds ratio (OR) = 1.67: 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.65) and high cancer worry (OR = 3.12: CI 1.28-7.60). Findings suggest that women from BRCA1/2 negative families are a unique population and may be primed for behavior change. Findings also provide guidance for clinicians who can help develop genomic risk communications, promote informed decision making and customize behavioral interventions.

Appreciating the broad clinical features of SMAD4 mutation carriers: a multicenter chart review.

Heterozygous loss-of-function SMAD4 mutations are associated with juvenile polyposis syndrome and hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. Some carriers exhibit symptoms of both conditions, leading to juvenile polyposis-hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. Three families have been reported with connective tissue abnormalities. To better understand the spectrum and extent of clinical findings in SMAD4 carriers, medical records of 34 patients (20 families) from five clinical practices were reviewed. Twenty-one percent of the patients (7/34) had features suggesting a connective tissue defect: enlarged aortic root (n = 3), aortic and mitral insufficiency (n = 2), aortic dissection (n = 1), retinal detachment (n = 1), brain aneurysms (n = 1), and lax skin and joints (n = 1). Juvenile polyposis-specific findings were almost uniformly present but variable. Ninety-seven percent of the patients had colon polyps that were generally pan-colonic and of variable histology and number. Forty-eight percent of the patients (15/31) had extensive gastric polyposis. Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia features, including epistaxis (19/31, 61%), mucocutaneous telangiectases (15/31, 48%), liver arteriovenous malformation (6/16, 38%), brain arteriovenous malformation (1/26, 4%), pulmonary arteriovenous malformation (9/17, 53%), and intrapulmonary shunting (14/23, 61%), were documented in 76% of the patients. SMAD4 carriers should be managed for juvenile polyposis and hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia because symptoms of both conditions are likely yet unpredictable. Connective tissue abnormalities are an emerging component of juvenile polyposis-hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome, and larger studies are needed to understand these manifestations.

Newborn Screening for Li-Fraumeni Syndrome: Patient Perspectives.

Background: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is an inherited cancer predisposition syndrome with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 3,000-5,000 individuals. LFS poses a significant cancer risk throughout the lifespan, with notable cancer susceptibility in childhood. Despite being predominantly inherited, up to 20% of cases arise de novo. Surveillance protocols facilitate the reduction of mortality and morbidity through early cancer detection. While newborn screening (NBS) has proven effective in identifying newborns with rare genetic conditions, even those occurring as rarely as 1 in 185,000, its potential for detecting inherited cancer predispositions remains largely unexplored. Methods: This survey-based study investigates perspectives toward NBS for LFS among individuals with and parents of children with LFS receiving care at single comprehensive cancer center in the U.S. Results: All participants unanimously supported NBS for LFS (n = 24). Reasons included empowerment (83.3%), control (66.7%), and peace of mind (54.2%), albeit with concerns about anxiety (62.5%) and devastation (50%) related to receiving positive results. Participants endorsed NBS as beneficial for cancer detection and prevention (91.7%), research efforts (87.5%), and family planning (79.2%) but voiced apprehensions about the financial cost of cancer surveillance (62.5%), emotional burdens (62.5%), and insurance coverage and discrimination (54.2%). Approximately 83% of respondents believed that parental consent should be required to screen newborns for LFS. Conclusion: This study revealed strong support for NBS for LFS despite the recognition of various perceived benefits and risks. These findings underscore the complex interplay between clinical, psychosocial, and ethical factors in considering NBS for LFS from the perspective of the LFS community.

Uptake of Cancer Genetic Services for Chatbot vs Standard-of-Care Delivery Models: The BRIDGE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Increasing numbers of unaffected individuals could benefit from genetic evaluation for inherited cancer susceptibility. Automated conversational agents (ie, chatbots) are being developed for cancer genetics contexts; however, randomized comparisons with standard of care (SOC) are needed. Objective: To examine whether chatbot and SOC approaches are equivalent in completion of pretest cancer genetic services and genetic testing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This equivalence trial (Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services [BRIDGE] randomized clinical trial) was conducted between August 15, 2020, and August 31, 2023, at 2 US health care systems (University of Utah Health and NYU Langone Health). Participants were aged 25 to 60 years, had had a primary care visit in the previous 3 years, were eligible for cancer genetic evaluation, were English or Spanish speaking, had no prior cancer diagnosis other than nonmelanoma skin cancer, had no prior cancer genetic counseling or testing, and had an electronic patient portal account. Intervention: Participants were randomized 1:1 at the patient level to the study groups at each site. In the chatbot intervention group, patients were invited in a patient portal outreach message to complete a pretest genetics education chat. In the enhanced SOC control group, patients were invited to complete an SOC pretest appointment with a certified genetic counselor. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were completion of pretest cancer genetic services (ie, pretest genetics education chat or pretest genetic counseling appointment) and completion of genetic testing. Equivalence hypothesis testing was used to compare the study groups. Results: This study included 3073 patients (1554 in the chatbot group and 1519 in the enhanced SOC control group). Their mean (SD) age at outreach was 43.8 (9.9) years, and most (2233 of 3063 [72.9%]) were women. A total of 204 patients (7.3%) were Black, 317 (11.4%) were Latinx, and 2094 (75.0%) were White. The estimated percentage point difference for completion of pretest cancer genetic services between groups was 2.0 (95% CI, -1.1 to 5.0). The estimated percentage point difference for completion of genetic testing was -1.3 (95% CI, -3.7 to 1.1). Analyses suggested equivalence in the primary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of the BRIDGE equivalence trial support the use of chatbot approaches to offer cancer genetic services. Chatbot tools can be a key component of sustainable and scalable population health management strategies to enhance access to cancer genetic services. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03985852.

Serrated polyposis: colonic phenotype, extracolonic features, and familial risk in a large cohort.

BACKGROUND: Serrated polyposis is a poorly understood and likely underdiagnosed condition. Little is known regarding the colorectal cancer risk, extracolonic phenotype, and cause of serrated polyposis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the clinical and family history features of a large cohort of individuals with serrated polyposis. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study from 2 prospectively collected registries. PATIENTS: Patients meeting the updated 2010 World Health Organization criteria for serrated polyposis were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics for clinical and family history factors. RESULTS: A total of 52 individuals met criteria for serrated polyposis. Of these, one had Lynch syndrome and was not included in the statistical analyses. Median age at serrated polyposis diagnosis was 51 years (range, 18-77). Twenty-four (47%) patients were male, and 25 (49%) had a history of smoking. Two hundred sixty-eight lower endoscopic procedures were performed; 42 (82%) patients had colorectal adenomas, 8 (16%) had a personal history of colorectal cancer (only 1 was diagnosed during follow-up), 12 (24%) had extracolonic tumors (4 had more than 1 primary tumor), and 19 (37%) reported a family history of colorectal cancer. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in 30 individuals revealed only 1 (3%) with unexplained gastroduodenal polyps. No association was found between colorectal cancer diagnosis and sex, age at serrated polyposis diagnosis, extracolonic tumor, history of adenoma, or smoking status. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study with no comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroduodenal polyps are uncommon and likely not associated with serrated polyposis. Although extracolonic tumors were common in our cohort, it is still unclear whether these are associated with serrated polyposis. Our data, along with previous studies, support an association between serrated polyposis and smoking. Further work is still needed to clarify the effect of smoking on polyp development/progression in serrated polyposis.

Classification of missense substitutions in the BRCA genes: a database dedicated to Ex-UVs.

Unclassified sequence variants (UVs) arising from clinical mutation screening of cancer susceptibility genes present a frustrating issue to clinical genetics services and the patients that they serve. We created an open-access database holding missense substitutions from the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. The main inclusion criterion is that each variant should have been assessed in a published work that used the Bayesian integrated evaluation of unclassified BRCA gene variants. Transfer of data on these substitutions from the original publications to our database afforded an opportunity to analyze the missense substitutions under a single model and to remove inconsistencies that arose during the evolution of the integrated evaluation over the last decade. This analysis also afforded the opportunity to reclassify these missense substitutions according to the recently published IARC 5-Class system. From an initial set of 248 missense substitutions, 31 were set aside due to nonnegligible probability to interfere with splicing. Of the remaining substitutions, 28 fell into one of the two pathogenic classes (IARC Class 4 or 5), 174 fell into one of the two nonpathogenic classes (IARC Class 1 or 2), and 15 remain in IARC Class 3, "Uncertain." The database is available at http://brca.iarc.fr/LOVD.

Non-Melanoma Skin Cancers and Other Cutaneous Manifestations in Bone Marrow Failure Syndromes and Rare DNA Repair Disorders.

Although most non-melanoma skin cancers are felt to be sporadic in origin, these tumors do play a role in several cancer predisposition syndromes. The manifestations of skin cancers in these hereditary populations can include diagnosis at extremely early ages and/or multiple primary cancers, as well as tumors at less common sites. Awareness of baseline skin cancer risks for these individuals is important, particularly in the setting of treatments that may compromise the immune system and further increase risk of cutaneous malignancies. Additionally, diagnosis of these disorders and management of non-cutaneous manifestations of these diseases have profound implications for both the patient and their family. This review highlights the current literature on the diagnosis, features, and non-melanoma skin cancer risks associated with lesser-known cancer predisposition syndromes, including bone marrow failure disorders, genomic instability disorders, and base excision repair disorders.

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.

Association of Disparities in Family History and Family Cancer History in the Electronic Health Record With Sex, Race, Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity, and Language Preference in 2 Large US Health Care Systems.

Importance: Clinical decision support (CDS) algorithms are increasingly being implemented in health care systems to identify patients for specialty care. However, systematic differences in missingness of electronic health record (EHR) data may lead to disparities in identification by CDS algorithms. Objective: To examine the availability and comprehensiveness of cancer family history information (FHI) in patients' EHRs by sex, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, and language preference in 2 large health care systems in 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective EHR quality improvement study used EHR data from 2 health care systems: University of Utah Health (UHealth) and NYU Langone Health (NYULH). Participants included patients aged 25 to 60 years who had a primary care appointment in the previous 3 years. Data were collected or abstracted from the EHR from December 10, 2020, to October 31, 2021, and analyzed from June 15 to October 31, 2021. Exposures: Prior collection of cancer FHI in primary care settings. Main Outcomes and Measures: Availability was defined as having any FHI and any cancer FHI in the EHR and was examined at the patient level. Comprehensiveness was defined as whether a cancer family history observation in the EHR specified the type of cancer diagnosed in a family member, the relationship of the family member to the patient, and the age at onset for the family member and was examined at the observation level. Results: Among 144 484 patients in the UHealth system, 53.6% were women; 74.4% were non-Hispanic or non-Latino and 67.6% were White; and 83.0% had an English language preference. Among 377 621 patients in the NYULH system, 55.3% were women; 63.2% were non-Hispanic or non-Latino, and 55.3% were White; and 89.9% had an English language preference. Patients from historically medically undeserved groups-specifically, Black vs White patients (UHealth: 17.3% [95% CI, 16.1%-18.6%] vs 42.8% [95% CI, 42.5%-43.1%]; NYULH: 24.4% [95% CI, 24.0%-24.8%] vs 33.8% [95% CI, 33.6%-34.0%]), Hispanic or Latino vs non-Hispanic or non-Latino patients (UHealth: 27.2% [95% CI, 26.5%-27.8%] vs 40.2% [95% CI, 39.9%-40.5%]; NYULH: 24.4% [95% CI, 24.1%-24.7%] vs 31.6% [95% CI, 31.4%-31.8%]), Spanish-speaking vs English-speaking patients (UHealth: 18.4% [95% CI, 17.2%-19.1%] vs 40.0% [95% CI, 39.7%-40.3%]; NYULH: 15.1% [95% CI, 14.6%-15.6%] vs 31.1% [95% CI, 30.9%-31.2%), and men vs women (UHealth: 30.8% [95% CI, 30.4%-31.2%] vs 43.0% [95% CI, 42.6%-43.3%]; NYULH: 23.1% [95% CI, 22.9%-23.3%] vs 34.9% [95% CI, 34.7%-35.1%])-had significantly lower availability and comprehensiveness of cancer FHI (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that systematic differences in the availability and comprehensiveness of FHI in the EHR may introduce informative presence bias as inputs to CDS algorithms. The observed differences may also exacerbate disparities for medically underserved groups. System-, clinician-, and patient-level efforts are needed to improve the collection of FHI.

Awareness and preferences regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing among Latinas and non-Latina white women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

This study was an investigation of awareness, cognitions, and psychosocial and educational needs related to genetic counseling and testing among Latinas and non-Latina whites at increased risk for having a BRCA1/2 mutation. Sixty-three Latina and eighty-four non-Latina white women completed telephone surveys employing a mixture of quantitative and qualitative questions assessing awareness, benefits, risks, barriers, and genetic counseling communication preferences regarding BRCA1/2 testing. Among participants who had not previously had genetic counseling/testing, 56.9% of Latinas (29/51) and 34.8% of non-Latina white participants (24/69) were unaware of the availability of BRCA1/2 testing. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, Latina ethnicity was the only statistically significant independent factor associated with lack of awareness (OR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.19-0.35). No appreciable differences were noted between ethnic groups regarding perceived benefits of BRCA1/2 testing or desired genetic counseling topics. These findings underscore the importance of increasing awareness of cancer genetic counseling and genetic testing among both Latina and non-Latina white populations.

Researcher Knowledge, Attitudes, and Communication Practices for Genomic Data Sharing.

This study examines knowledge, attitudes, and communication practices toward genomic data sharing among principal investigators and research coordinators engaged in cancer and non-cancer studies. We conducted 25 individual semi-structured interviews and conducted a qualitative thematic analysis. Most interviewees had basic knowledge of data sharing requirements, but lacked specific details of recent changes to NIH policy. Principal investigators perceived more risks to participants for data sharing than the research coordinators who generally obtained consent. Interviewees perceived a trend toward providing fewer data sharing options to participants in the consent process, and had observed that parents of pediatric patients asked more questions than adult patients. Our findings highlight potential areas for improvement related to data sharing during consent processes.

Exploring attitudes, beliefs, and communication preferences of Latino community members regarding BRCA1/2 mutation testing and preventive strategies.

PURPOSE: To inform development of a culturally sensitive hereditary breast and ovarian cancer communication initiative and related clinical genetic services. METHODS: Five focus groups were conducted with 51 female and male Latinos. Educational materials were designed to communicate information about hereditary breast or ovarian cancer and availability of relevant clinical services or prevention strategies. Focus groups explored participants' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, BRCA1/2 testing, and communication preferences for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer health messages. RESULTS: Overall, awareness of familial breast and ovarian cancer and availability of genetic risk assessment was low. Once informed, participants held favorable attitudes toward risk assessment and counseling services. Critical themes of the research highlighted the need to provide bilingual media products and use of a variety of strategies to increase awareness about hereditary cancer risk and availability of clinical genetic services. Important barriers were identified regarding family cancer history communication and cancer prevention services. Strategies were suggested for communicating cancer genetic information to increase awareness and overcome these barriers; these included both targeted and tailored approaches. CONCLUSION: This research suggests that cancer genetic communication efforts should consider community and cultural perspectives as well as health care access issues before widespread implementation.

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.