Stephanie A Cohen1, Dawn M Nixon2. 1. Cancer Genetics Risk Assessment Program, St. Vincent Health, 8402 Harcourt Rd #200, Indianapolis, IN, 46260, USA. sacohen@stvincent.org. 2. Cancer Genetics Risk Assessment Program, St. Vincent Health, 8402 Harcourt Rd #200, Indianapolis, IN, 46260, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate a unique approach to cancer risk assessment for improved access by smaller rural communities. METHODS: Local, on-site nurse navigators were trained and utilized as genetic counselor extenders (GCEs) to provide basic risk assessment and offer BRCA1/2 genetic testing to select patients based on a triaging process in collaboration with board-certified genetic counselors (CGCs). RESULTS: From August 2012 to July 2014, 12,477 family history questionnaires representing 8937 unique patients presenting for a screening mammogram or new oncology appointment were triaged. Of these, 8.2 % patients were identified at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer, and 4.2 % were identified at increased risk for other hereditary causes of cancer. A total of 75 of 1130 at-risk patients identified (6.6 %) completed a genetic risk assessment appointment; 23 with a GCE and 52 with a CGC. A review of the completed genetic test requisition forms from a 9-year pre-collaboration time period found that 16 % (20/125) did not appear to meet genetic testing criteria. Overall, there was a fourfold increase in patients accessing genetic services in this study period compared to the pre-collaboration time period. Efficiency of this model was assessed by determining time spent by the CGC in all activities related to the collaboration, which amounted to approximately 16 h/month. Adjustments have been made and the program continues to be monitored for opportunities to improve efficiency. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of CGCs and GCEs collaborating to improve access to quality services in an efficient manner.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate a unique approach to cancer risk assessment for improved access by smaller rural communities. METHODS: Local, on-site nurse navigators were trained and utilized as genetic counselor extenders (GCEs) to provide basic risk assessment and offer BRCA1/2 genetic testing to select patients based on a triaging process in collaboration with board-certified genetic counselors (CGCs). RESULTS: From August 2012 to July 2014, 12,477 family history questionnaires representing 8937 unique patients presenting for a screening mammogram or new oncology appointment were triaged. Of these, 8.2 % patients were identified at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer, and 4.2 % were identified at increased risk for other hereditary causes of cancer. A total of 75 of 1130 at-risk patients identified (6.6 %) completed a genetic risk assessment appointment; 23 with a GCE and 52 with a CGC. A review of the completed genetic test requisition forms from a 9-year pre-collaboration time period found that 16 % (20/125) did not appear to meet genetic testing criteria. Overall, there was a fourfold increase in patients accessing genetic services in this study period compared to the pre-collaboration time period. Efficiency of this model was assessed by determining time spent by the CGC in all activities related to the collaboration, which amounted to approximately 16 h/month. Adjustments have been made and the program continues to be monitored for opportunities to improve efficiency. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of CGCs and GCEs collaborating to improve access to quality services in an efficient manner.
Authors: Piper Nicolosi; Elisa Ledet; Shan Yang; Scott Michalski; Brandy Freschi; Erin O'Leary; Edward D Esplin; Robert L Nussbaum; Oliver Sartor Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Nick Dragojlovic; Kennedy Borle; Nicola Kopac; Ursula Ellis; Patricia Birch; Shelin Adam; Jan M Friedman; Amy Nisselle; Alison M Elliott; Larry D Lynd Journal: Genet Med Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Anne Brédart; Jean-Luc Kop; Antonis C Antoniou; Alex P Cunningham; Antoine De Pauw; Marc Tischkowitz; Hans Ehrencrona; Sylvie Dolbeault; Léonore Robieux; Kerstin Rhiem; Douglas F Easton; Peter Devilee; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Rita Schmutlzer Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Peter D Beitsch; Pat W Whitworth; Kevin Hughes; Rakesh Patel; Barry Rosen; Gia Compagnoni; Paul Baron; Rache Simmons; Linda Ann Smith; Ian Grady; Michael Kinney; Cynara Coomer; Karen Barbosa; Dennis R Holmes; Eric Brown; Linsey Gold; Patricia Clark; Lee Riley; Samuel Lyons; Antonio Ruiz; Sadia Kahn; Heather MacDonald; Lisa Curcio; Mary Kay Hardwick; Shan Yang; Ed D Esplin; Robert L Nussbaum Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-12-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kyra Bokkers; Michiel Vlaming; Ellen G Engelhardt; Ronald P Zweemer; Inge M van Oort; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; Eveline M A Bleiker; Margreet G E M Ausems Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-19 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Ridgely Fisk Green; Mary Ari; Katherine Kolor; W David Dotson; Scott Bowen; Nancy Habarta; Juan L Rodriguez; Lisa C Richardson; Muin J Khoury Journal: Genet Med Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Soyoun Rachel Kim; Alicia Tone; Raymond H Kim; Matthew Cesari; Blaise A Clarke; Lua Eiriksson; Tae L Hart; Melyssa Aronson; Spring Holter; Alice Lytwyn; Manjula Maganti; Leslie Oldfield; Steven Gallinger; Marcus Q Bernardini; Amit M Oza; Bojana Djordjevic; Jordan Lerner-Ellis; Emily Van de Laar; Danielle Vicus; Trevor J Pugh; Aaron Pollett; Sarah E Ferguson Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 6.860