Bethany Torr, Christopher Jones, Grace Kavanaugh, Monica Hamill, Sophie Allen, Subin Choi, Alice Garrett, Mikel Valganon-Petrizan, Suzanne MacMahon, Lina Yuan, Rosalind Way, Helena Harder, Rochelle Gold, Amy Taylor, Rhian Gabe, Anneke Lucassen, Ranjit Manchanda, Lesley Fallowfield, Valerie Jenkins, Ashu Gandhi, D. Gareth Evans, Angela George, Michael Hubank, Zoe Kemp, Stephen Bremner, Clare Turnbull
{"title":"BRCA-DIRECT digital pathway for diagnostic germline genetic testing within a UK breast oncology setting: a randomised, non-inferiority trial","authors":"Bethany Torr, Christopher Jones, Grace Kavanaugh, Monica Hamill, Sophie Allen, Subin Choi, Alice Garrett, Mikel Valganon-Petrizan, Suzanne MacMahon, Lina Yuan, Rosalind Way, Helena Harder, Rochelle Gold, Amy Taylor, Rhian Gabe, Anneke Lucassen, Ranjit Manchanda, Lesley Fallowfield, Valerie Jenkins, Ashu Gandhi, D. Gareth Evans, Angela George, Michael Hubank, Zoe Kemp, Stephen Bremner, Clare Turnbull","doi":"10.1038/s41416-024-02832-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Genetic testing to identify germline high-risk pathogenic variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes is increasingly part of the breast cancer diagnostic pathway. Novel patient-centred pathways may offer opportunity to expand capacity and reduce turnaround time. We recruited 1140 women with unselected breast cancer to undergo germline genetic testing through the BRCA-DIRECT pathway (which includes a digital platform, postal saliva sampling and a genetic counsellor telephone helpline). Ahead of consenting to the test, participants were randomised to receive information about genetic testing digitally (569/1140, 49.9%) or via a pre-test genetic counselling consultation (571/1140, 50.1%). 1001 (87.8%) participants progressed to receive their pre-test information and consented to testing. The primary outcome, uptake of genetic testing, was higher amongst participants randomised to receive digital information compared with those randomised to a pre-test genetic counselling consultation (90.8% (95% CI: 88.5% to 93.1%) vs 84.7% (95% CI: 81.8% to 87.6%), p = 0.002, adjusted for participant age and site). Non-inferiority was observed in relation to patient knowledge, anxiety, and satisfaction. Findings demonstrate that standardised, digital information offers a non-inferior alternative to conventional genetic counselling, and an end-to-end patient-centred, digital pathway (supported by genetic counselling hotline) could feasibly be implemented into breast oncology settings. The study is registered with, and protocol available on, ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04842799).","PeriodicalId":9243,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41416-024-02832-2.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41416-024-02832-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Genetic testing to identify germline high-risk pathogenic variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes is increasingly part of the breast cancer diagnostic pathway. Novel patient-centred pathways may offer opportunity to expand capacity and reduce turnaround time. We recruited 1140 women with unselected breast cancer to undergo germline genetic testing through the BRCA-DIRECT pathway (which includes a digital platform, postal saliva sampling and a genetic counsellor telephone helpline). Ahead of consenting to the test, participants were randomised to receive information about genetic testing digitally (569/1140, 49.9%) or via a pre-test genetic counselling consultation (571/1140, 50.1%). 1001 (87.8%) participants progressed to receive their pre-test information and consented to testing. The primary outcome, uptake of genetic testing, was higher amongst participants randomised to receive digital information compared with those randomised to a pre-test genetic counselling consultation (90.8% (95% CI: 88.5% to 93.1%) vs 84.7% (95% CI: 81.8% to 87.6%), p = 0.002, adjusted for participant age and site). Non-inferiority was observed in relation to patient knowledge, anxiety, and satisfaction. Findings demonstrate that standardised, digital information offers a non-inferior alternative to conventional genetic counselling, and an end-to-end patient-centred, digital pathway (supported by genetic counselling hotline) could feasibly be implemented into breast oncology settings. The study is registered with, and protocol available on, ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04842799).
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Cancer is one of the most-cited general cancer journals, publishing significant advances in translational and clinical cancer research.It also publishes high-quality reviews and thought-provoking comment on all aspects of cancer prevention,diagnosis and treatment.