C Bethan Powell1, Cecile Laurent2, Giuseppe Ciaravino3, Christine Garcia4, Liz Han3, Elizabeth Hoodfar5, Audrey Karlea5, Christine Kobelka5, Jaimie Lee6, Ramey D Littell4, Janise Roh2, Agniezka Vay3, Lawrence H Kushi2. 1. Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program San Francisco, United States of America. Electronic address: Bethan.Powell@kp.org. 2. Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, United States of America. 3. Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program Oakland, United States of America. 4. Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program San Francisco, United States of America. 5. Kaiser Permanente Northern California Genetics Department, United States of America. 6. Kaiser Permanente Oakland Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Program, United States of America.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Referral to Genetics for pre-testing counseling may be inefficient for women with ovarian cancer. This study assesses feasibility of gynecologic oncologists directly offering genetic testing. METHODS: A prospective pilot study was conducted at two gynecologic oncology hubs in an integrated healthcare system from May 1 to November 6, 2019. Gynecologic oncologists offered multigene panel testing to women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, followed by selective genetic counseling. Outcomes were compared between study participants and women from other hubs in the health system. RESULTS: Of ovarian cancer patients at study sites, 40 participated and all underwent genetic testing. Of 101 patients diagnosed at other sites, 85% were referred to genetics (p = .0061 compared to pilot participants) and 67% completed testing (p < .0001). The time from diagnosis to blood draw and notification of result was 18.5 and 34 days for the pilot group compared to 25.5 and 53 days at other sites. Panel testing detected 9 (22.5%) and 7 (10.3%, p = .08) pathogenic mutations in each group, respectively. Patients and providers were highly satisfied with the streamlined process. CONCLUSION: Genetic testing performed at the gynecologic oncology point of care for patients with ovarian cancer is feasible, increases uptake of testing, and improves time to results.
OBJECTIVE: Referral to Genetics for pre-testing counseling may be inefficient for women with ovarian cancer. This study assesses feasibility of gynecologic oncologists directly offering genetic testing. METHODS: A prospective pilot study was conducted at two gynecologic oncology hubs in an integrated healthcare system from May 1 to November 6, 2019. Gynecologic oncologists offered multigene panel testing to women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, followed by selective genetic counseling. Outcomes were compared between study participants and women from other hubs in the health system. RESULTS: Of ovarian cancerpatients at study sites, 40 participated and all underwent genetic testing. Of 101 patients diagnosed at other sites, 85% were referred to genetics (p = .0061 compared to pilot participants) and 67% completed testing (p < .0001). The time from diagnosis to blood draw and notification of result was 18.5 and 34 days for the pilot group compared to 25.5 and 53 days at other sites. Panel testing detected 9 (22.5%) and 7 (10.3%, p = .08) pathogenic mutations in each group, respectively. Patients and providers were highly satisfied with the streamlined process. CONCLUSION: Genetic testing performed at the gynecologic oncology point of care for patients with ovarian cancer is feasible, increases uptake of testing, and improves time to results.
Authors: Jeanna M McCuaig; Emily Thain; Janet Malcolmson; Sareh Keshavarzi; Susan Randall Armel; Raymond H Kim Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Miranda L G Hallquist; Eric P Tricou; Kelly E Ormond; Juliann M Savatt; Curtis R Coughlin; W Andrew Faucett; Laura Hercher; Howard P Levy; Julianne M O'Daniel; Holly L Peay; Melissa Stosic; Maureen Smith; Wendy R Uhlmann; Hannah Wand; Karen E Wain; Adam H Buchanan Journal: Genome Med Date: 2021-04-29 Impact factor: 11.117
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: Kyra Bokkers; Ronald P Zweemer; Marco J Koudijs; Sanne Stehouwer; Mary E Velthuizen; Eveline M A Bleiker; Margreet G E M Ausems Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 2.446
Authors: Kyra Bokkers; Eveline M A Bleiker; Jacob P Hoogendam; Mary E Velthuizen; Henk W R Schreuder; Cornelis G Gerestein; Joost G Lange; Jacqueline A Louwers; Marco J Koudijs; Margreet G E M Ausems; Ronald P Zweemer Journal: Hered Cancer Clin Pract Date: 2022-09-08 Impact factor: 2.164