Cathryn Koptiuch1, Whitney F Espinel1, Wendy K Kohlmann1, Jingsong Zhao2, Kimberly A Kaphingst1,3. 1. Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 2. Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. 3. Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Abstract
PURPOSE: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for germline genetic testing have included pancreatic cancer in the context of additional family cancer history for many years but this was not recommended for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) independent of a family history until 2019. This hypothesis-generating study reports the results from multigene panel testing for PDAC patients at an academic medical center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective longitudinal feasibility study examined responses to genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among PDAC and breast or ovarian cancer (BrOv) patients between October 2016 and November 2017. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed perceptions of genetic risk and testing, recall, comprehension, and emotional reactions to results using open-ended and closed-ended items. RESULTS: Forty-six BrOv and 33 PDAC patients were enrolled, and 44 BrOv and 31 PDAC participants underwent genetic testing. Seven pathogenic variants were identified in six BrOv participants (13.6%), and three pathogenic variants were identified in three PDAC participants (9.7%). The majority of both cohorts expressed similar attitudes about the importance of genetic testing for their personal and family medical management and expressed accurate understanding of implications of their results. Although sample size was small, there were no significant differences between the BrOv and PDAC cohorts for positive or negative emotions. CONCLUSION: This study points to high rates of positive emotions and low rates of negative emotions following genetic test results, suggesting that the emotional reactions to genetic test results are similar for patients with BrOv and PDAC, despite poor prognosis with PDAC diagnoses. Because of the unique needs of the PDAC population following diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach to germline genetic testing following diagnosis may result in best patient and family member outcomes.
PURPOSE: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for germline genetic testing have included pancreatic cancer in the context of additional family cancer history for many years but this was not recommended for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) independent of a family history until 2019. This hypothesis-generating study reports the results from multigene panel testing for PDAC patients at an academic medical center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective longitudinal feasibility study examined responses to genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among PDAC and breast or ovarian cancer (BrOv) patients between October 2016 and November 2017. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed perceptions of genetic risk and testing, recall, comprehension, and emotional reactions to results using open-ended and closed-ended items. RESULTS: Forty-six BrOv and 33 PDAC patients were enrolled, and 44 BrOv and 31 PDAC participants underwent genetic testing. Seven pathogenic variants were identified in six BrOv participants (13.6%), and three pathogenic variants were identified in three PDAC participants (9.7%). The majority of both cohorts expressed similar attitudes about the importance of genetic testing for their personal and family medical management and expressed accurate understanding of implications of their results. Although sample size was small, there were no significant differences between the BrOv and PDAC cohorts for positive or negative emotions. CONCLUSION: This study points to high rates of positive emotions and low rates of negative emotions following genetic test results, suggesting that the emotional reactions to genetic test results are similar for patients with BrOv and PDAC, despite poor prognosis with PDAC diagnoses. Because of the unique needs of the PDAC population following diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach to germline genetic testing following diagnosis may result in best patient and family member outcomes.
Authors: David Cella; Chanita Hughes; Amy Peterman; Chih-Hung Chang; Beth N Peshkin; Marc D Schwartz; Lari Wenzel; Amy Lemke; Alfred C Marcus; Caryn Lerman Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: I Esteban; M Vilaró; E Adrover; A Angulo; E Carrasco; N Gadea; A Sánchez; T Ocaña; G Llort; R Jover; J Cubiella; S Servitja; M Herráiz; L Cid; S Martínez; M J Oruezábal-Moreno; I Garau; S Khorrami; A Herreros-de-Tejada; R Morales; J M Cano; R Serrano; M H López-Ceballos; S González-Santiago; M J Juan-Fita; C Alonso-Cerezo; A Casas; B Graña; A Teulé; E Alba; A Antón; C Guillén-Ponce; A B Sánchez-Heras; J E Alés-Martínez; J Brunet; F Balaguer; J Balmaña Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Mary B Daly; Robert Pilarski; Matthew B Yurgelun; Michael P Berry; Saundra S Buys; Patricia Dickson; Susan M Domchek; Ahmed Elkhanany; Susan Friedman; Judy E Garber; Michael Goggins; Mollie L Hutton; Seema Khan; Catherine Klein; Wendy Kohlmann; Allison W Kurian; Christine Laronga; Jennifer K Litton; Julie S Mak; Carolyn S Menendez; Sofia D Merajver; Barbara S Norquist; Kenneth Offit; Tuya Pal; Holly J Pederson; Gwen Reiser; Kristen Mahoney Shannon; Kala Visvanathan; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Myra J Wick; Kari B Wisinski; Mary A Dwyer; Susan D Darlow Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Hans Vasen; Isaura Ibrahim; Carmen Guillen Ponce; Emily P Slater; Elvira Matthäi; Alfredo Carrato; Julie Earl; Kristin Robbers; Anneke M van Mil; Thomas Potjer; Bert A Bonsing; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; Wilma Bergman; Martin Wasser; Hans Morreau; Günter Klöppel; Christoph Schicker; Martin Steinkamp; Jens Figiel; Irene Esposito; Evelina Mocci; Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; Alfonso Sanjuanbenito; Maria Muñoz-Beltran; José Montans; Peter Langer; Volker Fendrich; Detlef K Bartsch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kimberly A Kaphingst; Colleen M McBride; Christopher Wade; Sharon Hensley Alford; Robert Reid; Eric Larson; Andreas D Baxevanis; Lawrence C Brody Journal: Genet Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Kimberly A Kaphingst; Emily Peterson; Jingsong Zhao; Anna Gaysynsky; Ashley Elrick; Soo Jung Hong; Melinda Krakow; Manusheela Pokharel; Chelsea L Ratcliff; William M P Klein; Muin J Khoury; Wen-Ying Sylvia Chou Journal: Genet Med Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Michael Goggins; Kasper Alexander Overbeek; Randall Brand; Sapna Syngal; Marco Del Chiaro; Detlef K Bartsch; Claudio Bassi; Alfredo Carrato; James Farrell; Elliot K Fishman; Paul Fockens; Thomas M Gress; Jeanin E van Hooft; R H Hruban; Fay Kastrinos; Allison Klein; Anne Marie Lennon; Aimee Lucas; Walter Park; Anil Rustgi; Diane Simeone; Elena Stoffel; Hans F A Vasen; Djuna L Cahen; Marcia Irene Canto; Marco Bruno Journal: Gut Date: 2019-10-31 Impact factor: 23.059