Search

Genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer now includes practitioners from multiple healthcare professions, specialties, and settings. This study examined whether non-genetics professionals ( NGPs) perform guideline-based patient intake and informed consent before genetic testing. NGPs offering BRCA testing services in Florida ( n = 386) were surveyed about clinical practices. Among 81 respondents (response rate = 22%), approximately half reported: sometimes scheduling a separate session for pre-test counseling lasting 11-30 min prior to testing, discussing familial implications of testing, benefits and limitations of risk management options, and discussing the potential psychological impact and insurance-related issues. Few constructed a three-generation pedigree, discussed alternative hereditary cancer syndromes, or the meaning of a variant result. This lack of adherence to guideline-based practice may result in direct harm to patients and their family members. NGPs who are unable to deliver guideline adherent cancer genetics services should focus on identification and referral of at-risk patients to in person or telephone services provided by genetics professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Scalable solutions are needed to make pre-test genetic education about inherited cancer risk accessible across diverse and underserved populations. We evaluated an automated strategy to deliver genetic education through a web-based video among young Black females with breast cancer. Methods: 96 participants were recruited through state cancer registries in Florida and Tennesee. All participants viewed a 12 min video and completed a ten question quiz on inherited cancer knowledge before and after viewing the video. Median pre- and postvideo knowledge scores were categorized as <60% versus ≥60% and compared across demographic and clinical characteristics using binary logistic regression. Results: Of the 96 participants, mean age was 51, over 50% had income <$50 K, over 40% did not graduate college or have private insurance, and over 70% had previous genetic testing. Median knowledge scores significantly increased after viewing the video ( p  < 001), with no significant differences in those with or without prior testing. A higher post-video knowledge score was associated with an income ≥$50 K, a college degree, and private insurance (all p  < .05). Conclusion: Among a population of young Black breast cancer patients, the educational video significantly increased knowledge. Findings support the use of automated pre-test educational tools as a scalable solution to make these services more accessible across populations.

Purpose: All women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC) ≤age 50 should be referred for genetic counseling (GC) and testing. We sought to compare differences in provider practices and access across a racially and ethnically diverse population of young BC survivors., Methods: A registry-based sample of women diagnosed with invasive BC ≤age 50 from 2009 to 2012 was recruited through the Florida Cancer Registry, and completed a questionnaire and medical record release. Differences were compared across those tested with or without the involvement of a board-certified or credentialed genetics health professional (GHP) in (1) clinical and demographic variables and (2) pretest GC elements., Results: Of 1622 participants, there were 440 Blacks, 285 Hispanics, and 897 Non-Hispanic Whites. Of 831 participants with medical record verification of testing provider, 170 (20%) had documentation of GHP involvement. Among the 613 who recalled a pretest discussion and had GC elements collected, those with GHP involvement were significantly more likely to recall the seven recognized GC elements., Conclusion: GHP involvement was associated with adherence to nationally recommended best practices. With the expanding importance of identifying inherited cancers, it is critical to ensure equitable access to best practices across all populations.

Aims: This study compared facilitators and barriers to genetic testing and determined awareness about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) across young Hispanic and non-Hispanic white (NHW) breast cancer (BC) survivors., Materials and Methods: Women diagnosed with BC of age ≤50 years in 2009-2012 were recruited through the Florida State Cancer Registry to complete a questionnaire., Results: There were 1182 participants of which 61% (174/285) of Hispanic patients, and 65% (580/897) of NHW patients had BC testing. Among untested participants, the most common barriers were lack of testing recommendation (44% Hispanics, 32% NHW; p = 0.02) and cost-related concerns (41% Hispanics, 40% NHW; p = 0.83). Among tested participants, the top facilitators were as follows: (1) "To benefit my family's future" (70% Hispanic, 68% NHW), (2) "My doctor recommended testing" (60% Hispanic, 54% NHW), and (3) "Minimal cost to me" (59% Hispanic, 72% NHW). Only 27% of tested and 15% of untested women were aware of GINA; misuse of test results was reported as a barrier for only 6.5%., Conclusions: Rates of genetic testing recommendation are lower among Hispanics, but both groups reported additional barriers. Most are unaware of GINA, yet misuse is not a highly cited barrier. Findings suggest the need to educate providers on the importance of recommending testing to all who meet criteria; increase awareness of newer options for more affordable testing; and bolster facilitators that may increase testing uptake.

Objective: Prior studies demonstrating minimal psychological consequences for women receiving genetic counseling/genetic testing (GC/GT) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer rely on predominantly Caucasian women. We conducted a prospective follow-up of a subset of participants from a population-based study of Black breast cancer (BC) survivors receiving GC/GT for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations., Methods: Black women with invasive BC at age ≤ 50 years diagnosed between 2009 and 2012 were recruited through the Florida Cancer Registry. Participants (n = 215, age M = 44.7, SD = 6.2) were offered telephone pre- and post-test GC, a subset completed questionnaires assessing sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables., Results: There were no baseline differences in cancer-related distress, psychological distress, or quality of life between test result groups. Social well-being improved in women receiving negative results (P = .01), but no other outcomes demonstrated significant changes over time between groups., Conclusions: Our study is among the first to demonstrate minimal negative psychosocial outcomes following GC/GT among young Black BC survivors, irrespective of test results., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Black women are disproportionately affected with triple-negative breast cancer and have relatively poor survival. To the authors' knowledge, it is not known to what extent differences in the clinical presentation of breast cancer between non-Hispanic white women and black women can be accounted for by the presence of mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. The authors sought to evaluate the frequency of BRCA pathogenic variants in a population-based sample of young black women with breast cancer., Methods: Black women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at age ≤50 years from 2009 to 2012 were recruited to the study through the Florida Cancer Registry. Participants underwent genetic counseling, completed a study questionnaire, and consented to release of their medical records. Saliva specimens were collected for BRCA sequencing and large rearrangement testing through multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification., Results: A DNA sample was evaluated for 396 women, 49 of whom (12.4%) had a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Eight recurrent mutations accounted for 49% of all pathogenic variants., Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, the prevalence of BRCA mutations among the Florida-based sample of young black women with breast cancer in the current study exceeds that previously reported for non-Hispanic white women. It is appropriate to recommend BRCA testing in all young black women with invasive breast cancer., (© 2015 American Cancer Society.)

Concerns about the potential for genomic advances to increase health disparities have been raised. Thus, it is important to assess referral and uptake of genetic counseling (GC) and testing in minority populations at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Black women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer ≤age 50 in 2009-2012 were recruited through the Florida State Cancer Registry 6-18 months following diagnosis and completed a baseline questionnaire. Summary statistics, Chi-square tests, and path modeling were conducted to examine which demographic and clinical variables were associated with referral and access to genetic services. Of the 440 participants, all met national criteria for GC, yet only 224 (51 %) were referred for or received GC and/or HBOC testing. Variables most strongly associated with healthcare provider referral for GC included having a college education (OR 2.1), diagnosis at or below age 45 (OR 2.0), and triple negative tumor receptor status (OR 1.7). The strongest association with receipt of GC and/or HBOC testing was healthcare provider referral (OR 7.9), followed by private health insurance at diagnosis (OR 2.8), and household income greater than $35,000 in the year prior to diagnosis (OR 2.0). Study findings suggest efforts are needed to improve genetic services access among a population-based sample of high-risk Black women. These results indicate that socioeconomic factors and physician referral patterns contribute to disparities in access to genetic services within this underserved minority population.

Purpose: This study describes practitioner knowledge and practices related to BRCA testing and management and explores how training may contribute to practice patterns., Methods: A survey was mailed to all BRCA testing providers in Florida listed in a publicly available directory. Descriptive statistics characterized participants and their responses., Results: Of the 87 respondents, most were community-based physicians or nurse practitioners. Regarding BRCA mutations, the majority (96%) recognized paternal inheritance and 61% accurately estimated mutation prevalence. For a 35-year-old unaffected BRCA mutation carrier, the majority followed national management guidelines. However, 65% also recommended breast ultrasonography. Fewer than 40% recognized the need for comprehensive rearrangement testing when BRACAnalysis(®) was negative in a woman at 30% risk. Finally, fewer than 15% recognized appropriate testing for a BRCA variant of uncertain significance. Responses appeared to be positively impacted by presence and type of cancer genetics training., Conclusions: In our sample of providers who order BRCA testing, knowledge gaps in BRCA prevalence estimates and appropriate screening, testing, and results interpretation were identified. Our data suggest the need to increase regulation and oversight of genetic testing services at a policy level, and are consistent with case reports that reveal liability risks when genetic testing is conducted without adequate knowledge and training.