Dataset Information

Pediatric Oncologists' Experiences Returning and Incorporating Genomic Sequencing Results into Cancer Care.

ABSTRACT: Pediatric oncologists' perspectives around returning and incorporating tumor and germline genomic sequencing (GS) results into cancer care are not well-described. To inform optimization of cancer genomics communication, we assessed oncologists' experiences with return of genomic results (ROR), including their preparation/readiness for ROR, collaboration with genetic counselors (GCs) during ROR, and perceived challenges. The BASIC3 study paired pediatric oncologists with GCs to return results to patients' families. We thematically analyzed 24 interviews with 12 oncologists at two post-ROR time points. Oncologists found pre-ROR meetings with GCs and geneticists essential to interpreting patients' reports and communicating results to families. Most oncologists took a collaborative ROR approach where they discussed tumor findings and GCs discussed germline findings. Oncologists perceived many roles for GCs during ROR, including answering families' questions and describing information in lay language. Challenges identified included conveying uncertain information in accessible language, limits of oncologists' genetics expertise, and navigating families' emotional responses. Oncologists emphasized how GCs' and geneticists' support was essential to ROR, especially for germline findings. GS can be successfully integrated into cancer care, but to account for the GC shortage, alternative ROR models and access to genetics resources will be needed to better support families and avoid burdening oncologists.

SUBMITTER: Hsu RL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8235493 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Current medical practice includes the application of genomic sequencing (GS) in clinical and research settings. Despite expanded use of this technology, the process of disclosure of genomic results to patients and research participants has not been thoroughly examined and there are no established best practices. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 genetic and non-genetic clinicians returning results of GS as part of the NIH funded Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium projects. Interviews focused on the logistics of sessions, participant/patient reactions and factors influencing them, how the sessions changed with experience, and resources and training recommended to return genomic results. RESULTS:The length of preparation and disclosure sessions varied depending on the type and number of results and their implications. Internal and external databases, online resources and result review meetings were used to prepare. Respondents reported that participants' reactions were variable and ranged from enthusiasm and relief to confusion and disappointment. Factors influencing reactions were types of results, expectations and health status. A recurrent challenge was managing inflated expectations about GS. Other challenges included returning multiple, unanticipated and/or uncertain results and navigating a rare diagnosis. Methods to address these challenges included traditional genetic counseling techniques and modifying practice over time in order to provide anticipatory guidance and modulate expectations. Respondents made recommendations to improve access to genomic resources and genetic referrals to prepare future providers as the uptake of GS increases in both genetic and non-genetic settings. CONCLUSIONS:These findings indicate that returning genomic results is similar to return of results in traditional genetic testing but is magnified by the additional complexity and potential uncertainty of the results. Managing patient expectations, initially identified in studies of informed consent, remains an ongoing challenge and highlights the need to address this issue throughout the testing process. The results of this study will help to guide future providers in the disclosure of genomic results and highlight educational needs and resources necessary to prepare providers. Future research on the patient experience, understanding and follow-up of recommendations is needed to more fully understand the disclosure process.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Thirty years after the origin of the field of psycho-oncology, limited data exist about the work practices of professionals providing psychosocial care to children with cancer and their families. METHOD:A survey was designed to assess training, work environment, theoretical orientation, services provided, subspecialty areas or areas of special interest, satisfactions, challenges, and continuing education needs of pediatric psycho-oncologists. Members of national and international psycho-oncology organizations were invited to participate in the web-based survey. RESULTS:Seven hundred eighty-six professionals from 63 countries responded. The sample consisted mostly of psychologists (41%), physicians (20%), and social workers (14%). Approximately half of the participants worked in a designated psycho-oncology unit. Psychologists and social workers provided the majority of psychosocial services. Individual sessions with parents were most common (42%), followed by sessions with children (41%), survivors (36%), families (31%), and siblings (25%). Therapies provided include cognitive behavioral therapy (50%), relaxation (43%), psychodynamic psychotherapy (27%), play therapy (26%), and imagery (23%). Two-thirds reported having appropriate supervision, 37% were conducting research, and only half felt their salary was appropriate. Differences in therapeutic modalities were found by country. Clinicians desire training on clinical interventions, improving communication with medical staff, research, and ethics. CONCLUSIONS:An international cohort of clinicians providing pediatric psycho-oncology services perform a wide variety of tasks, use a range of therapeutic approaches, and report considerable work satisfaction. Problem areas include professional inter-relations, inadequate supervision, and need for additional specialized training. Opportunity exists for global collaboration in pediatric psycho-oncology research and practices to enhance clinical effectiveness and reduce professional isolation.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Genomic sequencing has rapidly transitioned into clinical practice, improving diagnosis and treatment options for patients with hereditary disorders. However, large-scale implementation of genomic sequencing faces challenges, especially with regard to the return of incidental results, which refer to genetic variants uncovered during testing that are unrelated to the primary disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance. High-quality evidence evaluating health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results is critical for the adoption of genomic sequencing into clinical care and to understand the unintended consequences of adoption of genomic sequencing. We aim to evaluate the health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results for patients undergoing genomic sequencing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will compare health outcomes and costs of receiving, versus not receiving, incidental results for adult patients with cancer undergoing genomic sequencing in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Two hundred and sixty patients who have previously undergone first or second-tier genetic testing for cancer and received uninformative results will be recruited from familial cancer clinics in Toronto, Ontario. Participants in both arms will receive cancer-related results. Participants in the intervention arm have the option to receive incidental results. Our primary outcome is psychological distress at 2 weeks following return of results. Secondary outcomes include behavioural consequences, clinical and personal utility assessed over the 12 months after results are returned and health service use and costs at 12 months and 5 years. A subset of participants and providers will complete qualitative interviews about utility of incidental results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Research Ethics Review System that provides ethical review and oversight for multiple sites participating in the same clinical trial in Ontario.Results from the trial will be shared through stakeholder workshops, national and international conferences, and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03597165.

Dataset Information

Pediatric Oncologists' Experiences Returning and Incorporating Genomic Sequencing Results into Cancer Care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets