Literature DB >> 24962202

Genomic testing in cancer: patient knowledge, attitudes, and expectations.

Phillip S Blanchette1, Anna Spreafico, Fiona A Miller, Kelvin Chan, Jessica Bytautas, Steve Kang, Philippe L Bedard, Andrea Eisen, Larissa Potanina, Jack Holland, Suzanne Kamel-Reid, John D McPherson, Albiruni R Razak, Lillian L Siu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genomic testing in cancer (GTC) characterizes genes that play an important role in the development and growth of a patient's cancer. This form of DNA testing is currently being studied for its ability to guide cancer therapy. The objective of the current study was to describe patients' knowledge, attitudes, and expectations toward GTC.
METHODS: A 42-item self-administered GTC questionnaire was developed by a multidisciplinary group and patient pretesting. The questionnaire was distributed to patients with advanced cancer who were referred to the Princess Margaret Cancer Center for a phase 1 clinical trial or GTC testing.
RESULTS: Results were reported from 98 patients with advanced cancer, representing 66% of the patients surveyed. Seventy-six percent of patients were interested in learning more about GTC, and 64% reported that GTC would significantly improve their cancer care. The median score on a 12-item questionnaire to assess knowledge of cancer genomics was 8 of 12 items correct (67%; interquartile range, 7-9 of 12 items correct [58%-75%]). Scores were associated significantly with patients' education level (P < .0001). Sixty-six percent of patients would consent to a needle biopsy, and 39% would consent to an invasive surgical biopsy if required for GTC. Only 48% of patients reported having sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision to pursue GTC whereas 34% of patients indicated a need for formal genetic counseling.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced cancer are motivated to participate in GTC. Patients require further education to understand the difference between somatic and germline mutations in the context of GTC. Educational programs are needed to support patients interested in pursuing GTC.
© 2014 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  attitude; cancer; genomic testing; knowledge

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24962202     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  35 in total

1.  Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice Regarding Genetic Testing and Genetic Counselors in Jordan: A Population-Based Survey.

Authors:  Mamoun Ahram; Majd Soubani; Lana Abu Salem; Haneen Saker; Muayyad Ahmad
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Discussing molecular testing in oncology care: Comparing patient and physician information preferences.

Authors:  Ana P M Pinheiro; Rachel H Pocock; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Margie D Dixon; Walid L Shaib; Suresh S Ramalingam; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 3.  Ethical considerations in genomic testing for hematologic disorders.

Authors:  Jonathan M Marron; Steven Joffe
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  Young Adult Female Cancer Survivors' Concerns About Future Children's Health and Genetic Risk.

Authors:  Nirupa Jaya Raghunathan; Catherine Benedict; Bridgette Thom; Danielle Novetsky Friedman; Joanne Frankel Kelvin
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 2.223

5.  Utilization of clinical genetic counseling among childhood and young adult cancer survivors in a registry trial.

Authors:  Nassim Anderson; Arash Delavar; Danielle Novetsky Friedman; Vijai Joseph; Nidha Mubdi; Kevin C Oeffinger; Charles A Sklar; Kenneth Offit; Matthew Matasar; Nirupa Raghunathan; Zoltan Antal; David Straus; Michael Walsh; Alicia Latham; Emily S Tonorezos
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2020-07-16

6.  Patient-centered engagement and symptom/toxicity monitoring in the new era of tumor next-generation sequencing and immunotherapy: The OncoTool and OncoPRO platforms.

Authors:  Betina Yanez; Laura C Bouchard; David Cella; Jeffrey A Sosman; Sheetal M Kircher; Nisha A Mohindra; Massimo Cristofanilli; Frank J Penedo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Patient knowledge and information-seeking about personalized cancer therapy.

Authors:  Deevakar Rogith; Rafeek A Yusuf; Shelley R Hovick; Bryan M Fellman; Susan K Peterson; Allison M Burton-Chase; Yisheng Li; Elmer V Bernstam; Funda Meric-Bernstam
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 4.046

8.  Videos improve patient understanding of misunderstood chemotherapy terminology.

Authors:  Rebecca D Pentz; Minisha Lohani; Melissa Hayban; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Margie D Dixon; Richard J DeFeo; Gregg M Orloff; Ashesh B Jani; Viraj A Master
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Community education to enhance the more equitable use of precision medicine in Northern Manhattan.

Authors:  Grace C Hillyer; Karen M Schmitt; Andria Reyes; Alejandro Cruz; Maria Lizardo; Gary K Schwartz; Mary Beth Terry
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Engaging Patients in Precision Oncology: Development and Usability of a Web-Based Patient-Facing Genomic Sequencing Report.

Authors:  Ilana B Solomon; Sarah McGraw; Jenny Shen; Adem Albayrak; Gil Alterovitz; Melanie Davies; Catherine Del Vecchio Fitz; Rachel A Freedman; Lisa N Lopez; Lynette M Sholl; Eliezer Van Allen; Joanne Mortimer; Marwan Fakih; Sumanta Pal; Karen L Reckamp; Yuan Yuan; Stacy W Gray
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2020-04-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.