Dataset Information

Physicians' attitudes about multiplex tumor genomic testing.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Although predictive multiplex somatic genomic tests hold the potential to transform care by identifying targetable alterations in multiple cancer genes, little is known about how physicians will use such tests in practice.

Participants and methods

Before the initiation of enterprise-wide multiplex testing at a major cancer center, we surveyed all clinically active adult cancer physicians to assess their current use of somatic testing, their attitudes about multiplex testing, and their genomic confidence.

Results

A total of 160 physicians participated (response rate, 61%): 57% were medical oncologists; 29%, surgeons; 14% radiation oncologists; 37%, women; and 83%, research principal investigators. Twenty-two percent of physicians reported low confidence in their genomic knowledge. Eighteen percent of physicians anticipated testing patients infrequently (≤ 10%), whereas 25% anticipate testing most patients (≥ 90%). Higher genomic confidence was associated with wanting to test a majority of patients (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 6.09; 95% CI, 2.1 to 17.5) and anticipating using actionable (adjusted OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.2 to 5.2) or potentially actionable (adjusted OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.9) test results to inform treatment recommendations. Forty-two percent of physicians endorsed disclosure of uncertain genomic findings to patients.

Conclusion

Physicians at a tertiary-care National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center varied considerably in how they planned to incorporate predictive multiplex somatic genomic tests into practice and in their attitudes about the disclosure of genomic information of uncertain significance. Given that many physicians reported low genomic confidence, evidence-based guidelines and enhanced physician genomic education efforts may be needed to ensure that genomically guided cancer care is adequately delivered.

SUBMITTER: Gray SW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3992721 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:In this era of clinical genomics, the accumulation of knowledge of pharmacogenomics (PGx) is rising dramatically and attempts to utilize it in clinical practice are also increasing. However, this advanced knowledge and information have not yet been sufficiently utilized in the clinical field due to various barriers including physician factors. This study was conducted to evaluate the attitudes of physicians to PGx services by providing them their own genomic data analysis report focusing on PGx. We also tried to evaluate the clinical applicability of whole exome sequencing (WES)-based functional PGx test. In total 88 physicians participated in the study from September 2015 to August 2016. Physicians who agreed to participate in the study were asked to complete a pre-test survey evaluating their knowledge of and attitude toward clinical genomics including PGx. Only those who completed the pre-test survey proceeded to WES and were provided with a personal PGx analysis report in an offline group meeting. Physicians who received these PGx reports were asked to complete a follow-up survey within two weeks. We then analyzed changes in their knowledge and attitude after reviewing their own PGx analysis results through differences in their pre-test and post-test survey responses. In total, 70 physicians (79.5%) completed the pre-test and post-test surveys and attended an off-line seminar to review their personal PGx reports. After physicians reviewed the report, their perception of and attitude towards the PGx domain and genomics significantly changed. Physician' awareness of the likelihood of occurrence of adverse drug reactions and genetic contribution was also changed significantly. Overall, physicians were very positive about the value and potential of the PGx test but maintained a conservative stance on its actual clinical use. Results revealed that physicians' perception and attitude to the utility of PGx testing was significantly changed after reviewing their own WES results.

Project description:BackgroundThe twenty first century can be called the genomic era referring to the rapid development of genetics, and the beginning of genomic medicine. An initial step towards genomic medicine is to evaluate the knowledge and attitude towards genetic testing among different populations. The aims of this study were to assess the genetic knowledge and attitude towards genetic testing among the Jordanian population and patients with immune diseases. In addition, we evaluated the association between knowledge, attitude and several demographic factors of the population.MethodsThis study was performed using an online questionnaire that was distributed to respondents from different regions of Jordan.ResultsA total of 1149 participants were recruited from the Jordanian population. Overall factual genetic knowledge of the participants was good (65.4%), with education level, working or studying in a health-related field and household average monthly income being significant predictors of factual knowledge scores (P = 0.03, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). However, factual knowledge results revealed that scores of questions related to diseases were significantly higher than scores of gene-related scientific facts (P < 0.01). Participants of our study reported to have low perceived knowledge on medical uses (39.5%) and social consequences (23.9%) of genetic testing. Regarding the participants' attitudes, favorable attitudes towards genetic testing were prevailing (91.5%). Favorable attitudes were more prominent among higher educated participants, and participants with higher scores of factual knowledge.ConclusionDespite the fact that our Jordanian-based study revealed a good level of genetic knowledge as well as a favorable attitude towards genetic testing, we realized an imbalance of knowledge between gene-related scientific facts and disease-related concepts as well as between factual and perceived genetic knowledge, which indicates the necessity of increasing the awareness about genetic testing in order to ensure that individuals can take informed decisions that help in the employment of personalized medicine.

Project description:BackgroundThe strong association between family history and prostate cancer (PCa) suggests a significant genetic contribution, yet specific highly penetrant PCa susceptibility genes have not been identified. Certain single-nucleotide-polymorphisms have been found to correlate with PCa risk; however uncertainty remains regarding their clinical utility and how to best incorporate this information into clinical decision-making. Genetic testing is available directly to consumers and both patients and healthcare providers are becoming more aware of this technology. Purchasing online allows patients to bypass their healthcare provider yet patients may have difficulty interpreting test results and providers may be called upon to interpret results. Determining optimal ways to educate both patients and providers, and strategies for appropriately incorporating this information into clinical decision-making are needed.MethodsA mixed-method study was conducted in Utah between October 2011 and December 2011. Eleven focus group discussions were held and surveys were administered to 23 first-degree relatives of PCa patients living in Utah and 24 primary-care physicians and urologists practicing in Utah to present specific information about these assessments and determine knowledge and attitudes regarding health implications of using these assessments.ResultsData was independently coded by two researchers (relative Kappa = .88; provider Kappa = .77) and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Results indicated differences in attitudes and behavioral intentions between patient and provider. Despite the test's limitations relatives indicated interest in genetic testing (52%) while most providers indicated they would not recommend the test for their patients (79%). Relatives expected providers to interpret genetic test results and use results to provide personalized healthcare recommendations while the majority of providers did not think the information would be useful in patient care (92%) and indicated low-levels of genetic self-efficacy.ConclusionsAlthough similarities exist, discordance between provider and patient attitudes may influence the effective translation of novel genomic tests into clinical practice suggesting both patient and provider perceptions and expectations be considered in development of clinical decision-support tools.

Project description:BackgroundTo assess metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient psychological factors, perceptions, and comprehension of tumor genomic testing.MethodsIn a prospective, single institution, single-arm trial, patients with MBC underwent next-generation sequencing at study entry with sequencing results released at progression. Patients who completed surveys before undergoing sequencing were included in the present secondary analysis (n = 58). We administered four validated psychosocial measures: Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Trust in Physician Scale, and Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale for Cancer. Genetic comprehension was assessed using 7-question objective and 6-question subjective measures. Longitudinal data were assessed (n = 40) using paired Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar's test of agreement.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the beginning and end of study in depression, anxiety, physician trust, or self-efficacy (median time on study: 7.6 months). Depression and anxiety were positively associated with each other and both negatively associated with self-efficacy. Self-efficacy decreased from pre- to post-genomic testing (p = 0.05). Objective genetics comprehension did not significantly change from pre- to post-genomic testing, but patients expressed increased confidence in their ability to teach others about genetics (p = 0.04). Objective comprehension was significantly lower in non-white patients (p = 0.02) and patients with lower income (p = 0.04).ConclusionsThis is the only study, to our knowledge, to longitudinally evaluate multiple psychological metrics in MBC as patients undergo tumor genomic testing. Overall, psychological dimensions remained stable over the duration of tumor genomic testing. Among patients with MBC, depression and anxiety metrics were negatively correlated with patient self-efficacy. Patients undergoing somatic genomic testing had limited genomic knowledge, which varied by demographic groups and may warrant additional educational intervention.Clinical trial informationNCT01987726, registered November 13, 2013.