Patient Experience with a Gynecologic Oncology-Initiated Genetic Testing Model for Women with Tubo-Ovarian Cancer

Background: Up to 20% of women diagnosed with tubo-ovarian carcinoma carry a germline pathogenic variant in a cancer-predisposing gene (e.g., BRCA1/BRCA2). Identifying these variants can help to inform eligibility for therapies, guide surveillance and prevention of new primary cancers, and assess risk to family members. The Gynecologic Oncology-Initiated Genetic Testing Model (GOIGT) was initiated at the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) to streamline universal germline genetic testing for this population, while addressing the limited resources in the public healthcare system. This study aimed to evaluate the patient experience of participating in this model. Methods: Study participants were patients diagnosed with high-grade non-mucinous epithelial tubo-ovarian cancer who underwent genetic testing through the GOIGT model between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2020. Eligible participants completed the retrospective questionnaires at least one month after result disclosure. Results: A total of 126 patients were tested through the GOIGT model during the study period, of which 56 were invited to participate. Thirty-four participants returned the study questionnaire. Overall, participants did not report decision regret following the genetic testing and were satisfied with the GOIGT model. Participants reported low levels of uncertainty and distress related to the implications of their test results for themselves and their family members. Conclusions: The results of this study support the continued implementation of mainstreamed genetic testing models for women with high-grade non-mucinous tubo-ovarian cancer. Further studies are required to compare experiences for patients with different genetic test results.

[1]  R. Kim,et al.  A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Consent for Genetic Testing Using an Oncologist- or Genetic Counselor-Mediated Model of Care , 2021, Current oncology.

[2]  W. Foulkes,et al.  BRCA testing in women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: gynecologic oncologist-initiated testing compared with genetics referral , 2020, International Journal of Gynecological Cancer.

[3]  J. Ledermann,et al.  Mainstreamed genetic testing in ovarian cancer: patient experience of the testing process , 2019, International Journal of Gynecological Cancer.

[4]  E. Schlichting,et al.  Mainstreamed genetic testing of breast cancer patients in two hospitals in South Eastern Norway , 2019, Familial Cancer.

[5]  Angela Mariotto,et al.  Genetic Testing and Results in a Population-Based Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients and Ovarian Cancer Patients. , 2019, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  W. Meschino,et al.  Evolution of genetic assessment for BRCA-associated gynaecologic malignancies: a Canadian multisociety roadmap , 2018, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[7]  M. Porteous,et al.  Patients’ Views of Treatment-Focused Genetic Testing (TFGT): Some Lessons for the Mainstreaming of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Testing , 2018, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[8]  Gloria S. Huang,et al.  Evaluation of a Streamlined Oncologist-Led BRCA Mutation Testing and Counseling Model for Patients With Ovarian Cancer. , 2018, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  J. Ledermann,et al.  Mainstreamed genetic testing for women with ovarian cancer: first-year experience , 2018, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[10]  S. Narod,et al.  Coming of age in Canada: a study of population-based genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer. , 2017, Current oncology.

[11]  L. Senter,et al.  Genetic consultation embedded in a gynecologic oncology clinic improves compliance with guideline-based care. , 2017, Gynecologic oncology.

[12]  C. Scott,et al.  Mainstreaming cancer genetics: A model integrating germline BRCA testing into routine ovarian cancer clinics. , 2017, Gynecologic oncology.

[13]  S. Shariff,et al.  Genetics Consultation Rates Following a Diagnosis of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma in the Canadian Province of Ontario , 2016, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[14]  Suzanne Miller,et al.  New paradigms for BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in women with ovarian cancer: results of the Genetic Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (GTEOC) study , 2016, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[15]  Wulfran Cacheux,et al.  Ovarian cancer: Status of homologous recombination pathway as a predictor of drug response. , 2016, Critical reviews in oncology/hematology.

[16]  Tom Walsh,et al.  Inherited Mutations in Women With Ovarian Carcinoma. , 2016, JAMA oncology.

[17]  S. Seal,et al.  Implementing rapid, robust, cost-effective, patient-centred, routine genetic testing in ovarian cancer patients , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[18]  F. Légaré,et al.  Extent and Predictors of Decision Regret about Health Care Decisions , 2016, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  M. Franchi,et al.  BRCA somatic and germline mutation detection in paraffin embedded ovarian cancers by next-generation sequencing , 2016, Oncotarget.

[20]  Sheena M. Scroggins,et al.  Germline and Somatic Mutations in Homologous Recombination Genes Predict Platinum Response and Survival in Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Peritoneal Carcinomas , 2013, Clinical Cancer Research.

[21]  J. Sampalis,et al.  Assessment of symptomatic women for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer: results from the prospective DOvE pilot project. , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[22]  Deb Feldman-Stewart,et al.  Validation of a Decision Regret Scale , 2003, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[23]  D. Cella,et al.  A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. , 2002, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[24]  G. Mankekar,et al.  Clinical Features and Diagnosis , 2014 .