Genomic sequencing research in pediatric cancer care: Decision-making, attitudes, and perceived utility among adolescents and young adults and their parents.

PURPOSE: Professional guidelines recommend engaging adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in medical decision-making (DM), including whether to undergo genomic sequencing (GS). We explored DM around GS and attitudes after return of GS results among a diverse group of AYAs with cancer and their parents. METHODS: We surveyed AYAs with cancer (n=75) and their parents (n=52) six months after receiving GS results through the Texas KidsCanSeq Study. We analyzed AYAs' DM role in GS research enrollment and their satisfaction with that role. We compared AYAs' and parents' self-reported understanding of, attitudes toward, and perceived utility of the AYAs' GS results. RESULTS: Most AYAs reported equally sharing DM with their parents (55%) or leading DM (36%) about GS research. Compared to their cancer care DM role, 56% of AYAs reported the same level of involvement in GS research DM while 32% were more involved and 13% were less involved (p=0.011). AYAs were satisfied (99%) with their DM role regarding GS study participation. AYAs and parents had similar self-reported understanding of, attitudes toward, and perceived utility of the GS results. CONCLUSION: Our results support engaging AYAs in DM about GS research and provide insights into AYAs' DM preferences and positive attitudes toward GS.

Families' experiences accessing care after genomic sequencing in the pediatric cancer context: "It's just been a big juggle".

Access to genomic sequencing (GS) and resulting recommendations have not been well described in pediatric oncology. GS results may provide a cancer predisposition syndrome (CPS) diagnosis that warrants screening and specialist visits beyond cancer treatment, including testing or surveillance for family members. The Texas KidsCanSeq (KCS) Study evaluated implementation of GS in a diverse pediatric oncology population. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 20) to explore experiences of KCS patients' families around learning about a CPS diagnosis and following up on recommended care. We used qualitative content analysis to develop themes and subthemes across families' descriptions of their experiences accessing care and to understand which factors presented barriers and/or facilitators. We found participants had difficulty differentiating which follow-up care recommendations were made for their child's current cancer treatment versus the CPS. In families' access to follow-up care for CPS, organizational factors were crucial: travel time and distance were common hardships, while coordination of care to streamline multiple appointments with different providers helped facilitate CPS care. Financial factors also impacted families' access to CPS-related follow-up care: having financial assistance and insurance were facilitators for families, while costs and lack of insurance posed as barriers for patients who lost coverage during transitions from pediatric to adult care, and for adult family members who had no coverage. Factors related to beliefs and perceptions, specifically perceiving the risk as less salient to them and feeling overwhelmed with the patient's cancer care, presented barriers to follow-up care primarily for family members. Regarding social factors, competing life priorities made it difficult for families to access follow-up care, though having community support alleviated these barriers. We suggest interventions to improve coordination of cancer treatment and CPS-related care and adherence to surveillance protocols for families as children age, such as care navigators and integrating longitudinal genetic counseling into hereditary cancer centers.

Fresh takes on five health data sharing domains: Quality, privacy, equity, incentives, and sustainability.

As entities around the world invest in repositories and other infrastructure to facilitate health data sharing, scalable solutions to data sharing challenges are needed. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 experts to explore views on potential issues and policy options related to health data sharing. In this Perspective, we describe and contextualize unconventional insights shared by our interviewees relevant to issues in five domains: data quality, privacy, equity, incentives, and sustainability. These insights question a focus on granular quality metrics for gatekeeping; challenge enthusiasm for maximalist risk disclosure practices; call attention to power dynamics that potentially compromise the patient's voice; encourage faith in the sharing proclivities of new generations of scientists; and endorse accounting for personal disposition in the selection of long-term partners. We consider the merits of each insight with the broad goal of encouraging creative thinking to address data sharing challenges.

Views of Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer and Their Oncologists Toward Patients' Participation in Genomic Research.

Purpose: With increased use of genomic testing in cancer research and clinical care, it is important to understand the perspectives and decision-making preferences of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer and their treating oncologists. Methods: We conducted an interview substudy of the BASIC3 Study, which enrolled newly diagnosed cancer patients <18 years of age with assent. Of 32 young adults (YAs) with cancer who reached the age of majority (AOM; 18 years) while on study, 12 were successfully approached and all consented to study continuation at AOM. Of those, seven completed an interview. Patients' oncologists, who enrolled and participated in return of clinical genomic results, were also interviewed (n = 12). Interviews were transcribed, deidentified, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: YAs cited the possibility of helping others and advancing science as major reasons for their assent to initial study enrollment and their willingness to consent at AOM. YAs thought obtaining informed consent from research participants for study continuation at AOM was a good idea in case they changed their minds or wanted to make their own decisions, and to keep them aware of study activities. There was diversity in what YAs understood and learned from genomic testing: some recalled specific findings, while some remembered minimal information about their results. Oncologists varied in their assessment of adolescents' engagement with the study and understanding of their results. Conclusion: Given the different ways AYAs engage with genomic information, careful assessment of AYAs' diverse communication and decision-making preferences is needed to tailor interactions accordingly.

Key drivers of family-level utility of pediatric genomic sequencing: a qualitative analysis to support preference research.

Given that pediatric genomic sequencing (GS) may have implications for the health and well-being of both the child and family, a clearer understanding of the key drivers of the utility of GS from the family perspective is needed. The purpose of this study is to explore what is important to caregivers of pediatric patients regarding clinical GS, with a focus on family-level considerations. We conducted semi-structured interviews with caregivers (n = 41) of pediatric patients who had been recommended for or completed GS that explored the scope of factors caregivers considered when deciding whether to pursue GS for their child. We analyzed the qualitative data in multiple rounds of coding using thematic analysis. Caregivers raised important family-level considerations, in addition to those specifically for their child, which included wanting the best chance at good quality of life for the family, the ability to learn about family health, the impact on the caregiver's well-being, privacy concerns among family members, and the cost of testing to the family. We developed a framework of key drivers of utility consisting of four domains that influenced caregivers' decision making: underlying values, perceived benefits, perceived risks, and other pragmatic considerations regarding GS. These findings can inform measurement approaches that better capture the utility of pediatric GS for families and improve assessments of the value of clinical GS.

Parents' decision-making regarding whether to receive adult-onset only genetic findings for their children: Findings from the BabySeq Project.

PURPOSE: Most professional guidelines recommend against genetic screening for adult-onset only (AO) conditions until adulthood, yet others argue that there may be benefit to disclosing such results. We explored parents' decision-making on this issue in the BabySeq Project, a clinical trial of newborn genomic sequencing. METHODS: We conducted interviews with parents (N = 24) who were given the option to receive actionable AO results for their children. Interviews explored parents' motivations to receive and reasons to decline AO genetic disease risk information, their decision-making process, and their suggestions for supporting parents in making this decision. RESULTS: Parents noted several motivations to receive and reasons to decline AO results. Most commonly, parents cited early intervention/surveillance (n = 11), implications for family health (n = 7), and the ability to prepare (n = 6) as motivations to receive these results. The most common reasons to decline were protection of the child's future autonomy (n = 4), negative effect on parenting (n = 3), and anxiety about future disease (n = 3). Parents identified a number of ways to support parents in making this decision. CONCLUSION: Results show considerations to better support parental decision-making that aligns with their values when offering AO genetic information because it is more commonly integrated into pediatric clinical care.

Spanish-Language Communication of COVID-19 Information Across US Local Health Department Websites.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought new urgency to a longstanding problem: the US health system is not well-equipped to accommodate the country's large limited English proficient (LEP) population in times of national emergency. We examined the landscape of Spanish-language COVID-19 website information compared to information in English provided by health departments of the top 10 cities by population in the USA. For each city, coders evaluated three score measures (amount of information, presentation quality, and ease of navigation) for six content types (general information, symptoms, testing, prevention, vaccines, and live statistics) across six delivery modes (print resources, website text, videos, external links, data visualization, and media toolkits). We then calculated a grand average, combining all cities' values per score measure for each content type-delivery mode combination, to understand the landscape of Spanish-language information across the country. Overall, we found that, for all cities combined, nearly all content types and delivery modes in Spanish were inferior or non-existent compared to English resources. Our findings also showed much variability and spread concerning content type and delivery mode of information. Finally, our findings uncovered three main clusters of content type and delivery mode combinations for Spanish-language information, ranging from similar to worse, compared to information in English. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 information was not equivalently provided in Spanish, despite federal guidance regarding language access during times of national emergency. These results can inform ongoing and future emergency communication plans for Spanish-preferring LEP and other LEP populations in the USA.

Assessment of COVID-19 Website Communication in Languages Other than English by Local Health Departments in the United States.

Managing the information needs of diverse populations through accessible, high-quality, and evidence-based health communication is critical to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Access to comprehensive information is especially important for the >25 million limited English proficient (LEP) individuals in the U.S. who prefer to communicate in languages other than English. We assessed the alignment of COVID-19 communication with LEP constituents' needs by examining multilingual content availability on the health department websites of the largest U.S. cities by population. To guide content analysis, we designed a codebook to evaluate six content types, six delivery modes, and three score measures for each website; for each, we measured Holsti's percent of agreement. We then compared the amount of information provided in all combined content types across cities and languages by delivery mode. We thematically analyzed open-ended responses about users' experiences with each city's webpages. We found that COVID-19 information was not presented consistently across languages: many cities provided less information among several delivery modes in other languages compared to English. We found a discrepancy in the amount of information, presentation quality, and ease of navigability of the information among languages and between cities. Users described having negative experiences with most cities' COVID-19 websites in languages other than English. Our findings indicate a gap in the application of the cultural sensitivity approach by local health departments to address issues related to equitable multilingual, multimodal emergency communication, and underscore the need to improve guidelines for communicating public health information as a component of advancing health equity.

Examining access to care in clinical genomic research and medicine: Experiences from the CSER Consortium.

INTRODUCTION: Ensuring equitable access to health care is a widely agreed-upon goal in medicine, yet access to care is a multidimensional concept that is difficult to measure. Although frameworks exist to evaluate access to care generally, the concept of "access to genomic medicine" is largely unexplored and a clear framework for studying and addressing major dimensions is lacking. METHODS: Comprised of seven clinical genomic research projects, the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium (CSER) presented opportunities to examine access to genomic medicine across diverse contexts. CSER emphasized engaging historically underrepresented and/or underserved populations. We used descriptive analysis of CSER participant survey data and qualitative case studies to explore anticipated and encountered access barriers and interventions to address them. RESULTS: CSER's enrolled population was largely lower income and racially and ethnically diverse, with many Spanish-preferring individuals. In surveys, less than a fifth (18.7%) of participants reported experiencing barriers to care. However, CSER project case studies revealed a more nuanced picture that highlighted the blurred boundary between access to genomic research and clinical care. Drawing on insights from CSER, we build on an existing framework to characterize the concept and dimensions of access to genomic medicine along with associated measures and improvement strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support adopting a broad conceptualization of access to care encompassing multiple dimensions, using mixed methods to study access issues, and investing in innovative improvement strategies. This conceptualization may inform clinical translation of other cutting-edge technologies and contribute to the promotion of equitable, effective, and efficient access to genomic medicine.

Creating accessible Spanish language materials for Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium genomic projects: challenges and lessons learned.

Aim: To increase Spanish speakers' representation in genomics research, accessible study materials on genetic topics must be made available in Spanish. Materials & methods: The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium is evaluating genome sequencing for underserved populations. All sites needed Spanish translation of recruitment materials, surveys and return of results. Results: We describe our process for translating site-specific materials, as well as shared measures across sites, to inform future efforts to engage Spanish speakers in research. Conclusion: In translating and adapting study materials for roughly 1000 Spanish speakers across the USA, and harmonizing translated measures across diverse sites, we overcame numerous challenges. Translation should be performed by professionals. Studies must allocate sufficient time, effort and budget to translate and adapt participant materials.

Lay abstract To encourage Spanish speakers to join research studies, researchers need to give them written study materials they can easily read and understand. Our study of genome sequencing adapted and translated study materials for use by Spanish speakers across the USA. We describe our process and share our lessons to help others engage Spanish speakers in research. Studies that want to reach Spanish speakers must plan to spend time, effort and money to produce consistent, accurate Spanish-language study materials.

Pediatric Oncologists' Experiences Returning and Incorporating Genomic Sequencing Results into Cancer Care.

Pediatric oncologists' perspectives around returning and incorporating tumor and germline genomic sequencing (GS) results into cancer care are not well-described. To inform optimization of cancer genomics communication, we assessed oncologists' experiences with return of genomic results (ROR), including their preparation/readiness for ROR, collaboration with genetic counselors (GCs) during ROR, and perceived challenges. The BASIC3 study paired pediatric oncologists with GCs to return results to patients' families. We thematically analyzed 24 interviews with 12 oncologists at two post-ROR time points. Oncologists found pre-ROR meetings with GCs and geneticists essential to interpreting patients' reports and communicating results to families. Most oncologists took a collaborative ROR approach where they discussed tumor findings and GCs discussed germline findings. Oncologists perceived many roles for GCs during ROR, including answering families' questions and describing information in lay language. Challenges identified included conveying uncertain information in accessible language, limits of oncologists' genetics expertise, and navigating families' emotional responses. Oncologists emphasized how GCs' and geneticists' support was essential to ROR, especially for germline findings. GS can be successfully integrated into cancer care, but to account for the GC shortage, alternative ROR models and access to genetics resources will be needed to better support families and avoid burdening oncologists.

Psychological Distress Among the U.S. General Population During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic is taking a significant global toll on emotional well-being, but evidence of mental health impacts in the United States remains limited. In April 2020, we conducted an exploratory survey of U.S. residents to understand prevalence of and factors associated with psychological distress during the pandemic. Data collection was conducted using Qualtrics, an online survey platform, and U.S. adult respondents were recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform. Among 1,366 respondents, 42% (n = 571) reported clinically significant anxiety and 38% (n = 519) reported clinically significant depression. Factors associated with anxiety and depressive symptoms included Hispanic/Latino ethnicity; younger age; lower income; employment as or living with a health care worker-first responder; caregiver status; SARS-CoV-2 infection status; decreased frequency of engagement in healthy behaviors; and changed frequency of engagement in unhealthy behaviors. That some of these factors are associated with elevated distress during the pandemic is not yet widely appreciated and might be useful in informing management of mental health care resources.

A Right to Privacy and Confidentiality: Ethical Medical Care for Patients in United States Immigration Detention.

Recently, John Doe, an undocumented immigrant who was detained by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was admitted to a hospital off-site from a detention facility. Custodial officers accompanied Mr. Doe into the exam room and refused to leave as physicians examined him. In this analysis, we examine the ethical dilemmas this case brings to light concerning the treatment of patients in immigration detention and their rights to privacy. We analyze what US law and immigration detention standards allow regarding immigration enforcement or custodial officers' presence in medical exams and documentation of detainee health information. We describe the ethical implications of the presence of officers in medical exam rooms, including its effects on the quality of the patient-provider relationship, patient privacy and confidentiality, and provider's ability to provide ethical care. We conclude that the presence of immigration enforcement or custodial officers during medical examination of detainees is a breach of the right to privacy of detainees who are not an obvious threat to the public. We urge ICE and the US Department of Homeland Security to clarify standards for and tighten enforcement around when officers are legally allowed to be stationed in medical exam rooms and document detainees' information.

Responsibility, culpability, and parental views on genomic testing for seriously ill children.

PURPOSE: We describe parental perceptions of and experiences with genomic sequencing (GS) in the care of seriously ill children. Understanding parents' perspectives is vital for clinicians caring for children, given the uptake of genomic technologies into clinical practice. METHODS: Longitudinal, semistructured interviews were conducted with parents of pediatric cancer patients who underwent exome sequencing (ES) as a part of the BASIC3 study. Interviews were conducted at baseline, one to eight months after results disclosure, and approximately one year after disclosure. Using thematic qualitative analysis, parent interviews were coded with both inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Before receiving genomic information, parents indicated that they saw ES as something responsible parents would agree to if their child had cancer. Some parents talked about the possibility of sequencing affecting feelings of culpability for their child's cancer, worrying that they passed on a cancer-causing gene or made parenting decisions that caused the disease. However, after receiving their child's ES results many reported feeling relieved of guilt and worry, and felt they had fulfilled parental duties by agreeing to ES for their child. CONCLUSION: These results reveal a layer of meaning that parents associate with GS that may inform clinicians' approach to care.

Perceived Benefits, Risks, and Utility of Newborn Genomic Sequencing in the BabySeq Project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is interest in applying genomic sequencing (GS) to newborns' clinical care. Here we explore parents' and clinicians' attitudes toward and perceptions of the risks, benefits, and utility of newborn GS compared with newborn screening (NBS) prior to receiving study results. METHODS: The BabySeq Project is a randomized controlled trial used to explore the impact of integrating GS into the clinical care of newborns. Parents (n = 493) of enrolled infants (n = 309) and clinicians (n = 144) completed a baseline survey at enrollment. We examined between-group differences in perceived utility and attitudes toward NBS and GS. Open-ended responses about risks and benefits of each technology were categorized by theme. RESULTS: The majority of parents (71%) and clinicians (51%) agreed that there are health benefits of GS, although parents and clinicians agreed more that there are risks associated with GS (35%, 70%) than with NBS (19%, 39%; all P < .05). Parents perceived more benefit and less risk of GS than did clinicians. Clinicians endorsed concerns about privacy and discrimination related to genomic information more strongly than did parents, and parents anticipated benefits of GS that clinicians did not. CONCLUSIONS: Parents and clinicians are less confident in GS than NBS, but parents perceive a more favorable risk/benefit ratio of GS than do clinicians. Clinicians should be aware that parents' optimism may stem from their perceived benefits beyond clinical utility.

Exome sequencing disclosures in pediatric cancer care: Patterns of communication among oncologists, genetic counselors, and parents.

OBJECTIVE: To examine communication patterns and behaviors during disclosure of exome sequencing (ES) results to parents of pediatric cancer patients, and describe common themes in parental communication. METHODS: Using mixed methods, we analyzed transcripts of sessions where parents of pediatric cancer patients received ES results from an oncologist and genetic counselor. Seventy-six transcripts were analyzed for frequency of clinician information-giving, partnering-supportive talk, and active parent participation. A subset of 40 transcripts were analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Disclosures consisted mostly of clinician talk (84% of total talk), which was focused on providing information (62% of clinicians' utterances) with occasional partnering-supportive talk (7% of clinicians' utterances). Most parents assumed a passive, listening role (16% of total talk). Themes in parental communication included expressing relief and the significance of an answer, concern about sharing results and responsibility for inheritance, and seeking clarification of health implications of results. CONCLUSION: Our finding of low levels of active parent participation during ES disclosures highlights the need to improve patient/parent engagement and understanding in a genetic setting. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinician communication strategies that could encourage parent participation and understanding include checking for parent understanding, partnership-building, and tailoring ES discussions to address parent concerns and preferences.

Agents of empathy: How medical interpreters bridge sociocultural gaps in genomic sequencing disclosures with Spanish-speaking families.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how linguistic tools used by interpreters during return of genomic sequencing results may have impacted communication with Spanish-speaking families, and to discuss the implications for the role of medical interpreters. METHODS: Using discourse analysis, we identified and categorized the various ways hospital-based interpreters adapted clinicians' language in 37 audio-recorded sessions in which Spanish-speaking parents participating in a clinical trial received their child's genomic sequencing results from English-speaking clinicians. RESULTS: We found that interpreters adapted clinicians' statements using five empathic linguistic tools: contextualization, encouragement, checking comprehension, endearment, and softening. Interpreters used an average of four linguistic tools per session, with contextualization and encouragement being the most frequently used. CONCLUSIONS: Interpreters used empathic linguistic tools to alter clinicians' statements when communicating genomic information to Spanish-speaking families. Our findings demonstrate the critical role of interpreters as cultural mediators and facilitators of understanding for Spanish-speaking families. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study expands upon the definition of clinical empathy in interpreter-mediated sessions. Our findings suggest that revisions of standards of medical interpretation practice may be warranted regarding interpreters' ability to adapt clinicians' language in a culturally sensitive manner during interpretation.

Do privacy and security regulations need a status update? Perspectives from an intergenerational survey.

BACKGROUND: The importance of health privacy protections in the era of the "Facebook Generation" has been called into question. The ease with which younger people share personal information about themselves has led to the assumption that they are less concerned than older generations about the privacy of their information, including health information. We explored whether survey respondents' views toward health privacy suggest that efforts to strengthen privacy protections as health information is moved online are unnecessary. METHODS: Using Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which is well-known for recruitment for survey research, we distributed a 45-item survey to individuals in the U.S. to assess their perspectives toward privacy and security of online and health information, social media behaviors, use of health and fitness devices, and demographic information. RESULTS: 1310 participants (mean age: 36 years, 50% female, 78% non-Hispanic white, 54% college graduates or higher) were categorized by generations: Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers. In multivariate regression models, we found that generational cohort was an independent predictor of level of concern about privacy and security of both online and health information. Younger generations were significantly less likely to be concerned than older generations (all P < 0.05). Time spent online and social media use were not predictors of level of concern about privacy or security of online or health information (all P > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by the non-representativeness of our sample. CONCLUSIONS: Though Millennials reported lower levels of concern about privacy and security, this was not related to internet or social media behaviors, and majorities within all generations reported concern about both the privacy and security of their health information. Thus, there is no intergenerational imperative to relax privacy and security standards, and it would be advisable to take privacy and security of health information more seriously.

Portero versus portador: Spanish interpretation of genomic terminology during whole exome sequencing results disclosure.

AIM: Describe modifications to technical genomic terminology made by interpreters during disclosure of whole exome sequencing (WES) results. PATIENTS & METHODS: Using discourse analysis, we identified and categorized interpretations of genomic terminology in 42 disclosure sessions where Spanish-speaking parents received their child's WES results either from a clinician using a medical interpreter, or directly from a bilingual physician. RESULTS: Overall, 76% of genomic terms were interpreted accordantly, 11% were misinterpreted and 13% were omitted. Misinterpretations made by interpreters and bilingual physicians included using literal and nonmedical terminology to interpret genomic concepts. CONCLUSION: Modifications to genomic terminology made during interpretation highlight the need to standardize bilingual genomic lexicons. We recommend Spanish terms that can be used to refer to genomic concepts.

Parental Perspectives on Whole Exome Sequencing in Pediatric Cancer: A Typology of Perceived Utility.

PURPOSE: To explore how parents of pediatric cancer patients perceived the utility of clinical tumor and germline whole-exome sequencing (WES) results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted longitudinal interviews with parents of a diverse pediatric cancer population before disclosure of WES results (n=64), then one to eight months (n=33) after disclosure. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a thematic qualitative approach. RESULTS: Parents identified a broad range of types of utility for their child's WES results. Even when results did not affect their child's current treatment, they expressed optimism about future clinical utility for their child, themselves, and other family members. Parents also reported experiencing psychological utility including peace of mind, relief of guilt, and satisfaction of curiosity. Pragmatic utility, such as the ability to plan for the future and make better reproductive decisions, was also described. CONCLUSION: Parents of pediatric cancer patients perceive WES to have broad utility, including psychological and pragmatic utility, even if there is no direct impact on clinical care. Further work will need to consider how the value of genomic information should be characterized, how risks and benefits should be described, and how these results should inform recommendations and decisions about using WES.