Testing a Population-Based Outreach Intervention for Ovarian Cancer Survivors to Encourage their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic Counseling.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0147
Yue Guan, Colleen M McBride, Jingsong Zhao, Rebecca D Pentz, Cam Escoffery, Yuan Liu, Yichun Cao, Weihua An, James A Shepperd, Kevin C Ward
{"title":"Testing a Population-Based Outreach Intervention for Ovarian Cancer Survivors to Encourage their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic Counseling.","authors":"Yue Guan, Colleen M McBride, Jingsong Zhao, Rebecca D Pentz, Cam Escoffery, Yuan Liu, Yichun Cao, Weihua An, James A Shepperd, Kevin C Ward","doi":"10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most relatives of women with ovarian cancer are unaware of their increased risk for cancer and their eligibility for genetic counseling. State cancer registries offer a platform to communicate about inherited risk to this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a two-arm randomized trial to test a theory-based communication intervention-Your Family Connects (YFC)-compared to the standard Georgia Cancer Registry (GCR) contact. A total of 1,938 eligible ovarian cancer survivors were randomly assigned to either the YFC arm (n = 969) or the Standard Care arm (n = 969). We assessed the number of ovarian cancer survivors and their close relatives who logged on to the study website by arm.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Survivor reach was significantly higher in the Standard Care arm than YFC (20.8% vs. 15.2%, respectively; P < 0.001). However, reach to relatives was limited to listed relatives in the YFC arm (n = 20, 13.2%), with little participation from those in the Standard Care arm (n = 1, 0.4%). Pooling across arms, minority race, longer time since diagnosis, and older age were all significantly associated with a decreased likelihood that the survivor accessed the website.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The YFC intervention showed lower effectiveness for engaging survivors but was more effective than Standard Care in engaging at-risk relatives. Other factors (e.g., time since diagnosis) associated with lower reach must be considered in refining future outreach approaches.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>Partnering with a state cancer registry to foster family communication about inherited cancer risk is feasible but the possibility for broad population reach warrants further testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":9458,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"1185-1193"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11369613/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0147","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Most relatives of women with ovarian cancer are unaware of their increased risk for cancer and their eligibility for genetic counseling. State cancer registries offer a platform to communicate about inherited risk to this population.

Methods: We conducted a two-arm randomized trial to test a theory-based communication intervention-Your Family Connects (YFC)-compared to the standard Georgia Cancer Registry (GCR) contact. A total of 1,938 eligible ovarian cancer survivors were randomly assigned to either the YFC arm (n = 969) or the Standard Care arm (n = 969). We assessed the number of ovarian cancer survivors and their close relatives who logged on to the study website by arm.

Results: Survivor reach was significantly higher in the Standard Care arm than YFC (20.8% vs. 15.2%, respectively; P < 0.001). However, reach to relatives was limited to listed relatives in the YFC arm (n = 20, 13.2%), with little participation from those in the Standard Care arm (n = 1, 0.4%). Pooling across arms, minority race, longer time since diagnosis, and older age were all significantly associated with a decreased likelihood that the survivor accessed the website.

Conclusions: The YFC intervention showed lower effectiveness for engaging survivors but was more effective than Standard Care in engaging at-risk relatives. Other factors (e.g., time since diagnosis) associated with lower reach must be considered in refining future outreach approaches.

Impact: Partnering with a state cancer registry to foster family communication about inherited cancer risk is feasible but the possibility for broad population reach warrants further testing.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为卵巢癌幸存者测试基于人群的外联干预措施,以鼓励其近亲考虑遗传咨询。
背景:大多数卵巢癌女性患者的亲属不知道自己患癌风险增加,也不知道自己有资格接受遗传咨询。州癌症登记处提供了一个向这部分人群宣传遗传风险的平台:我们进行了一项双臂随机试验,以测试基于理论的沟通干预--"您的家庭联系"(YFC)--与佐治亚州癌症登记处(GCR)标准联系方式的比较。共有 1,938 名符合条件的卵巢癌幸存者被随机分配到 YFC 组(969 人)或标准护理组(969 人)。我们评估了各组登录研究网站的卵巢癌幸存者及其近亲的人数:结果:标准护理组的幸存者覆盖率明显高于 YFC 组(分别为 20.8% vs 15.2%;p 结论:YFC 干预对卵巢癌幸存者的有效性较低:YFC干预对幸存者的参与效果较低,但对高危亲属的参与效果优于标准护理。在改进未来的外展方法时,必须考虑到与较低接触率相关的其他因素(如确诊后的时间):影响:与州癌症登记处合作,促进家庭就遗传性癌症风险进行沟通是可行的。是否有可能广泛覆盖人群值得进一步测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.60%
发文量
538
审稿时长
1.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention publishes original peer-reviewed, population-based research on cancer etiology, prevention, surveillance, and survivorship. The following topics are of special interest: descriptive, analytical, and molecular epidemiology; biomarkers including assay development, validation, and application; chemoprevention and other types of prevention research in the context of descriptive and observational studies; the role of behavioral factors in cancer etiology and prevention; survivorship studies; risk factors; implementation science and cancer care delivery; and the science of cancer health disparities. Besides welcoming manuscripts that address individual subjects in any of the relevant disciplines, CEBP editors encourage the submission of manuscripts with a transdisciplinary approach.
期刊最新文献
Adverse birth and obstetric outcomes in the offspring of male adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: A nationwide population-based study. Incidence of serious complications following screening colonoscopy in adults aged 76 to 85 years old. Patterns of subsequent cancer incidence over time in patients with breast cancer. Polygenic risk score, healthy lifestyle score, and colorectal cancer risk: a prospective cohort study. Socioeconomic Inequalities in Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening in Ontario, Canada: A decomposition analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1