Development of an Electronic Decision Aid Tool to Facilitate Mainstream Genetic Testing in Ovarian Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Multigene panel testing is an important component of cancer treatment plans and risk assessment, but there are many different panel options and choosing the most appropriate panel can be challenging for health care providers and patients. Electronic tools have been proposed to help patients make informed decisions about which gene panel to choose by considering their preferences and priorities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic decision aid (DA) tool was developed in line with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards collaboration. The multidisciplinary project team collaborated with an external health care communications agency and the MGH Cancer Center Patient and Family Advisory Council (PFAC) to develop the DA. Surveys of genetic counselors and patients were used to scope the content, and alpha testing was used to refine the design and content. RESULTS: Surveys of genetic counselors (n = 12) and patients (n = 228) identified common themes in discussing panel size and strategies for helping patients decide between panels and in identifying confusing terms for patients and distribution of patients' choices. The DA, organized into 2 major sections, provides educational text, graphics, and videos to guide patients through the decision-making process. Alpha testing feedback from the PFAC (n = 4), genetic counselors (n = 3) and a group of lay people (n = 8) identified areas to improve navigation, simplify wording, and improve layout. CONCLUSION: The DA developed in this study has the potential to facilitate informed decision-making by patients regarding cancer genetic testing. The distinctive feature of this DA is that it addresses the specific question of which multigene panel may be most suitable for the patient. Its acceptability and effectiveness will be evaluated in future studies.

Factors associated with referral and completion of genetic counseling in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that all women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer undergo genetic testing, as the diagnosis of pathogenic variants may inform cancer survival and impact treatment options. The objective of this study was to assess factors associated with referral to genetic counseling in women with epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study identified women with epithelial ovarian cancer from 2012 to 2017 at Massachusetts General Hospital and North Shore Medical Center, a community hospital affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated how race, age, stage, year of diagnosis, insurance status, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, and language relates to the receipt of genetic counseling. RESULTS: Of the total 276 women included, 73.9% were referred for genetic screening, of which 90.7% attended a genetic counseling visit. Older women were less likely to undergo genetic counseling (age ≥70 years: OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.94, p=0.04). Women who died within 365 days of initial oncology consult rarely reached a genetic counselor (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.24, p<0.001). Women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer were more likely to undergo counseling (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.74-6.15, p<0.001). There was no difference in receipt of genetic counseling by race, stage, year of diagnosis, insurance status, or language. CONCLUSION: Older women with epithelial ovarian cancer and those who died within 1 year of initiation of care were less likely to undergo recommended genetic counseling. Race, insurance status, and language were not identified as predictive factors, although we were limited in this assessment by small sample size.

Finding a Balance: Reconciling the Needs of the Institution, Patient, and Genetic Counselor for Optimal Resource Utilization.

The current practice of cancer genetic counseling is undergoing widespread change and scrutiny. While there are clinical resources for genetic counselors (GCs) regarding the delivery of cancer genetic services, there is limited literature regarding effective management of a genetic counseling clinical program. We have developed administrative tools to manage a large team of GCs at a single academic medical center over a period of increasing demand for genetics services, with the initial aim of decreasing wait time for urgent genetic counseling visits. Here, we describe the three main elements of the clinical operations: Balancing patient volume between GCs, scheduling tracks for both routine and urgent appointments, and a team of triaging GCs to ensure appropriate patient referrals. For each of these elements, we describe how they have been modified over time and present data to support the utility of these strategies. The preliminary evidence offered here suggests that these tools allow for an equitable distribution of patient volume between team members, as well as the timely and accurate scheduling of urgent patients. As a result of the experiences presented here, other genetic counseling programs grappling with similar issues should be aware that it is possible to shift clinical operations to serve certain patient populations in a more timely fashion while keeping both providers and GC staff satisfied.