Catherine Goudie, Ma'n H Zawati, Bartha Maria Knoppers, Anne-Marie Laberge
{"title":"Genomic sequencing in paediatric oncology: navigating conflicting roles and responsibilities.","authors":"Catherine Goudie, Ma'n H Zawati, Bartha Maria Knoppers, Anne-Marie Laberge","doi":"10.1136/jmg-2024-110410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study explores the ethical and moral challenges faced by paediatric oncologists when they are informed of patient genomic results, particularly during molecular tumour boards (MTBs), highlighting the interplay between their clinic, research and expert roles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study using a survey distributed to paediatric oncologists in Quebec followed by optional semi-structured interviews. Oncologists' attitudes and comfort levels with six hypothetical germline DNA results identified in a patient from a clinical vignette were assessed using Likert scales. Hypothetical genetic results represented ethical challenges of extended paediatric genomic sequencing. Interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants to gain insight and context on key survey results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty per cent (n=28) of oncologists in Quebec completed the survey; five participated in the interviews. Comfort levels of oncologists were influenced by the type of genetic result (expected, secondary, incidental finding), whether or not the oncologist was the patient's treating physician, and whether the information disclosed to the patient aligned with the information that they had received. Awareness of a genetic result was sufficient to trigger a feeling of responsibility and liability for that result.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Oncologists who take part in genomic sequencing initiatives and who attend MTBs have privileged access to genomic results, above what may be accessible to patients. This imbalance in knowledge contributes to moral discomfort experienced by oncologists who feel responsible for genomic information they are aware of. We propose recommendations applicable to consent processes, policies and pipelines for sharing genomic results.</p>","PeriodicalId":16237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"138-146"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg-2024-110410","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This study explores the ethical and moral challenges faced by paediatric oncologists when they are informed of patient genomic results, particularly during molecular tumour boards (MTBs), highlighting the interplay between their clinic, research and expert roles.
Methods: This was an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study using a survey distributed to paediatric oncologists in Quebec followed by optional semi-structured interviews. Oncologists' attitudes and comfort levels with six hypothetical germline DNA results identified in a patient from a clinical vignette were assessed using Likert scales. Hypothetical genetic results represented ethical challenges of extended paediatric genomic sequencing. Interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants to gain insight and context on key survey results.
Results: Eighty per cent (n=28) of oncologists in Quebec completed the survey; five participated in the interviews. Comfort levels of oncologists were influenced by the type of genetic result (expected, secondary, incidental finding), whether or not the oncologist was the patient's treating physician, and whether the information disclosed to the patient aligned with the information that they had received. Awareness of a genetic result was sufficient to trigger a feeling of responsibility and liability for that result.
Conclusion: Oncologists who take part in genomic sequencing initiatives and who attend MTBs have privileged access to genomic results, above what may be accessible to patients. This imbalance in knowledge contributes to moral discomfort experienced by oncologists who feel responsible for genomic information they are aware of. We propose recommendations applicable to consent processes, policies and pipelines for sharing genomic results.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Medical Genetics is a leading international peer-reviewed journal covering original research in human genetics, including reviews of and opinion on the latest developments. Articles cover the molecular basis of human disease including germline cancer genetics, clinical manifestations of genetic disorders, applications of molecular genetics to medical practice and the systematic evaluation of such applications worldwide.