ASPO Abstracts
Preliminary results regarding patient uptake and satisfaction of an alternative model for cancer risk genetic testing
Category: Early Detection & Risk Prediction, Behavioral Science & Health Communication
Conference Year: 2018
Abstract Body:
Providing efficient, time-sensitive clinical genetic testing to cancer patients may be an important factor in guiding therapy and has preventive implications for patients and their families. Memorial Sloan Kettering is evaluating an alternative streamlined testing model involving pre-test education by a non-genetic healthcare provider in the form of a written brochure and narrated video with post-test genetic counseling and result disclosure by telephone. As part of an ongoing prospective study to evaluate psychosocial and behavioral implications of this alternative model, we examined patients’ uptake and self- reported satisfaction with the decision to undergo genetic testing via this approach. Participants (median age= 65, range= 38-92) were recruited from ovarian (n=40), prostate (n=24), and pancreas (n=4) clinics; to date, only 3 patients have declined testing through this study. Gender was the only sociodemographic factor associated with participants’ perceptions of the testing approach. Specifically, females were significantly more likely than males to report that the video presented information that helped them make their decision about whether or not to have genetic testing (M±SD = 3.78±1.00 vs. 3.10±.79), t(41)=2.46, p<.05. In addition, on a scale ranging from 1=“strongly disagree” to 5=“strongly agree”, females liked the video (3.87±.63) and found the video to be significantly more informative (3.78±.70) than their male counterparts (3.45±.51 and 3.20±.70, respectively; t(41)=2.39 and 2.32, ps<.05). Overall, participants’ satisfaction with the decision to have genetic testing (measured with the Satisfaction with Decisions Scale, scale range=4-20) was high (16.75±3.39), and was unrelated to sociodemographic factors including age, gender, and ECOG performance status (ps>.05). These preliminary findings suggest that pre-test counseling in the form of an educational video provided enough information for patients to provide consent to genetic testing. Additionally, patients were largely satisfied with their genetic testing decision. Future analyses will help determine the appropriateness of this approach by evaluating patients’ perspectives on coping, communication with at-risk family, and knowledge and understanding about their genetic test results.
Keywords: Cancer Risk Genetic Testing Genetic Counseling