乳腺癌基因检测体验:探究在线决策辅助工具在风险认知和决策制定中的潜在作用

Anna Vaynrub, Brian Salazar, Yilin Eileen Feng, Harry West, Alissa Michel, Subiksha Umakanth, Katherine Crew, Rita Kukafka
{"title":"乳腺癌基因检测体验:探究在线决策辅助工具在风险认知和决策制定中的潜在作用","authors":"Anna Vaynrub, Brian Salazar, Yilin Eileen Feng, Harry West, Alissa Michel, Subiksha Umakanth, Katherine Crew, Rita Kukafka","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.13.24313647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT (350/350 words) Background: Despite the role of pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes conferring significantly increased risk of breast cancer (BC), uptake of genetic testing (GT) remains low, especially among ethnic minorities. Our prior study identified that a patient decision aid, RealRisks, improved patient-reported outcomes relative to standard educational materials. This study examined patients GT experience and its influence on subsequent actions. We also sought to identify areas for improvement in RealRisks that would expand its focus from improved GT decision-making to understanding results.\nMethods: Women enrolled in the parent randomized controlled trial were recruited and interviewed. Demographic data was collected from surveys in the parent study. Interviews were conducted, transcribed, and coded to identify recurring themes. Descriptive statistics were generated to compare the interviewed subgroup to the original study cohort of 187 women. Results: Of the 22 women interviewed, 11 (50%) had positive GT results, 2 (9.1%) with a BRCA1/2 PV, and 9 (40.9%) with variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Median age was 40.5 years and 15 (71.4%) identified as non-Hispanic. Twenty (90.9%) reported a family history of BC, and 2 (9.1%) reported a family history of BRCA1/2 PV. The emerging themes included a preference for structured communication of GT results and the need for more actionable knowledge to mitigate BC risk, especially among patients with VUS or negative results. Few patients reported lifestyle changes following the return of their results, although they did understand that their behaviors can impact their BC risk. Conclusions: Patients preferred a structured explanation of their GT results to facilitate a more personal testing experience. While most did not change lifestyle behaviors in response to their GT results, there was a consistent call for further guidance following the initial discussion of GT results. Empowering patients, especially those with negative or VUS results, with the knowledge and context to internalize the implications of their results and form accurate risk perception represents a powerful opportunity to mediate subsequent risk management strategies. Informed by this study, future work will expand RealRisks to foster an accurate perception of GT results and include decision support to navigate concrete next steps.","PeriodicalId":501454,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Breast Cancer Genetic Testing Experience: Probing the Potential Utility of an Online Decision Aid in Risk Perception and Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"Anna Vaynrub, Brian Salazar, Yilin Eileen Feng, Harry West, Alissa Michel, Subiksha Umakanth, Katherine Crew, Rita Kukafka\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.09.13.24313647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT (350/350 words) Background: Despite the role of pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes conferring significantly increased risk of breast cancer (BC), uptake of genetic testing (GT) remains low, especially among ethnic minorities. Our prior study identified that a patient decision aid, RealRisks, improved patient-reported outcomes relative to standard educational materials. This study examined patients GT experience and its influence on subsequent actions. We also sought to identify areas for improvement in RealRisks that would expand its focus from improved GT decision-making to understanding results.\\nMethods: Women enrolled in the parent randomized controlled trial were recruited and interviewed. Demographic data was collected from surveys in the parent study. Interviews were conducted, transcribed, and coded to identify recurring themes. Descriptive statistics were generated to compare the interviewed subgroup to the original study cohort of 187 women. Results: Of the 22 women interviewed, 11 (50%) had positive GT results, 2 (9.1%) with a BRCA1/2 PV, and 9 (40.9%) with variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Median age was 40.5 years and 15 (71.4%) identified as non-Hispanic. Twenty (90.9%) reported a family history of BC, and 2 (9.1%) reported a family history of BRCA1/2 PV. The emerging themes included a preference for structured communication of GT results and the need for more actionable knowledge to mitigate BC risk, especially among patients with VUS or negative results. Few patients reported lifestyle changes following the return of their results, although they did understand that their behaviors can impact their BC risk. Conclusions: Patients preferred a structured explanation of their GT results to facilitate a more personal testing experience. While most did not change lifestyle behaviors in response to their GT results, there was a consistent call for further guidance following the initial discussion of GT results. Empowering patients, especially those with negative or VUS results, with the knowledge and context to internalize the implications of their results and form accurate risk perception represents a powerful opportunity to mediate subsequent risk management strategies. Informed by this study, future work will expand RealRisks to foster an accurate perception of GT results and include decision support to navigate concrete next steps.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Informatics\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.13.24313647\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.13.24313647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ABSTRACT (350/350 words) 背景:尽管癌症易感基因中的致病变异(PVs)会显著增加乳腺癌(BC)的患病风险,但基因检测(GT)的接受率仍然很低,尤其是在少数民族中。我们之前的研究发现,与标准教育材料相比,患者决策辅助工具 RealRisks 可改善患者报告的结果。本研究考察了患者的基因检测体验及其对后续行动的影响。我们还试图找出 RealRisks 需要改进的地方,从而将其重点从改善 GT 决策扩大到了解结果:我们招募并采访了参加母体随机对照试验的妇女。人口统计学数据从母体研究的调查中收集。对访谈进行了记录和编码,以确定重复出现的主题。通过描述性统计,将接受访谈的亚组与原始研究的 187 名妇女进行比较。结果:在 22 名受访女性中,11 人(50%)的 GT 结果呈阳性,2 人(9.1%)的 BRCA1/2 PV 呈阳性,9 人(40.9%)的变异意义不确定(VUS)。中位年龄为 40.5 岁,15 人(71.4%)为非西班牙裔。20人(90.9%)报告有BC家族史,2人(9.1%)报告有BRCA1/2 PV家族史。新出现的主题包括偏好有条理地交流 GT 结果,以及需要更多可操作的知识来降低 BC 风险,尤其是在 VUS 或阴性结果的患者中。尽管患者确实了解他们的行为会影响其 BC 风险,但很少有患者报告在结果出来后改变了生活方式。结论:患者更喜欢有条理地解释他们的 GT 结果,以便获得更个人化的检测体验。虽然大多数患者并没有因为 GT 结果而改变生活方式,但在对 GT 结果进行初步讨论后,他们一致要求得到进一步的指导。让患者,尤其是检测结果为阴性或 VUS 的患者,了解相关知识和背景,从而理解检测结果的意义,形成准确的风险认知,这将为后续的风险管理战略提供有力的支持。在本研究的启发下,未来的工作将扩展 RealRisks,以促进对 GT 结果的准确认知,并包括决策支持,以指导具体的下一步行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Breast Cancer Genetic Testing Experience: Probing the Potential Utility of an Online Decision Aid in Risk Perception and Decision Making
ABSTRACT (350/350 words) Background: Despite the role of pathogenic variants (PVs) in cancer predisposition genes conferring significantly increased risk of breast cancer (BC), uptake of genetic testing (GT) remains low, especially among ethnic minorities. Our prior study identified that a patient decision aid, RealRisks, improved patient-reported outcomes relative to standard educational materials. This study examined patients GT experience and its influence on subsequent actions. We also sought to identify areas for improvement in RealRisks that would expand its focus from improved GT decision-making to understanding results. Methods: Women enrolled in the parent randomized controlled trial were recruited and interviewed. Demographic data was collected from surveys in the parent study. Interviews were conducted, transcribed, and coded to identify recurring themes. Descriptive statistics were generated to compare the interviewed subgroup to the original study cohort of 187 women. Results: Of the 22 women interviewed, 11 (50%) had positive GT results, 2 (9.1%) with a BRCA1/2 PV, and 9 (40.9%) with variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Median age was 40.5 years and 15 (71.4%) identified as non-Hispanic. Twenty (90.9%) reported a family history of BC, and 2 (9.1%) reported a family history of BRCA1/2 PV. The emerging themes included a preference for structured communication of GT results and the need for more actionable knowledge to mitigate BC risk, especially among patients with VUS or negative results. Few patients reported lifestyle changes following the return of their results, although they did understand that their behaviors can impact their BC risk. Conclusions: Patients preferred a structured explanation of their GT results to facilitate a more personal testing experience. While most did not change lifestyle behaviors in response to their GT results, there was a consistent call for further guidance following the initial discussion of GT results. Empowering patients, especially those with negative or VUS results, with the knowledge and context to internalize the implications of their results and form accurate risk perception represents a powerful opportunity to mediate subsequent risk management strategies. Informed by this study, future work will expand RealRisks to foster an accurate perception of GT results and include decision support to navigate concrete next steps.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A case is not a case is not a case - challenges and solutions in determining urolithiasis caseloads using the digital infrastructure of a clinical data warehouse Reliable Online Auditory Cognitive Testing: An observational study Federated Multiple Imputation for Variables that Are Missing Not At Random in Distributed Electronic Health Records Characterizing the connection between Parkinson's disease progression and healthcare utilization Generative AI and Large Language Models in Reducing Medication Related Harm and Adverse Drug Events - A Scoping Review
×
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