Perceptions of Multicancer Detection Tests Among Primary Care Physicians and Laypersons: A Qualitative Study

IF 2.9 2区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Cancer Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1002/cam4.70281

Goli Samimi, Sarah M. Temkin, Carol J. Weil, Paul K. J. Han, Elyse LeeVan, Wendy S. Rubinstein, Tessa M. Swigart, Sarah Caban, Katherine Dent, Lori M. Minasian

{"title":"Perceptions of Multicancer Detection Tests Among Primary Care Physicians and Laypersons: A Qualitative Study","authors":"Goli Samimi, Sarah M. Temkin, Carol J. Weil, Paul K. J. Han, Elyse LeeVan, Wendy S. Rubinstein, Tessa M. Swigart, Sarah Caban, Katherine Dent, Lori M. Minasian","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Multicancer detection tests (MCDs) are blood-based tests designed to detect multiple cancer types. It is currently unclear whether these cancer screening tests improve mortality. To understand awareness of MCDs among providers and patients, as well as explore how they perceive the benefits, harms, and acceptability of MCDs, we have undertaken a focus group study in primary care physicians (PCPs) and laypersons to explore knowledge, attitudes, and expectations of cancer screening using MCDs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted six focus groups with 45 PCP participants and 12 focus groups with 80 layperson participants. Participants were identified via a consumer research firm and found eligible following the completion of a screener survey. Moderators used a semi-structured guide containing open-ended questions and prompts to facilitate the discussion. Recordings were transcribed and coded line by line using a codebook developed based on questions and emerging discussion concepts, and emergent themes were identified.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Both PCP and layperson participants felt the that benefits of MCDs included ease of use and potential ability to detect cancers early. However, they felt that additional data is needed to overcome some of the concerns related to MCDs. PCP participants expressed concerns related to lack of practice guidelines, cost of diagnostic follow-ups, privacy and insurance issues, fear/anxiety related to confirmation of MCD results, and malpractice liability related to perceived false negative test results. Layperson participants expressed concerns related to costs, insurance coverage, and privacy, as well as anxiety over the confirmation of a positive test result.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>There is a major need for more rigorous data regarding MCDs to inform the development of guidelines for use as cancer screening tools.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"13 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70281","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70281","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Multicancer detection tests (MCDs) are blood-based tests designed to detect multiple cancer types. It is currently unclear whether these cancer screening tests improve mortality. To understand awareness of MCDs among providers and patients, as well as explore how they perceive the benefits, harms, and acceptability of MCDs, we have undertaken a focus group study in primary care physicians (PCPs) and laypersons to explore knowledge, attitudes, and expectations of cancer screening using MCDs.

Methods

We conducted six focus groups with 45 PCP participants and 12 focus groups with 80 layperson participants. Participants were identified via a consumer research firm and found eligible following the completion of a screener survey. Moderators used a semi-structured guide containing open-ended questions and prompts to facilitate the discussion. Recordings were transcribed and coded line by line using a codebook developed based on questions and emerging discussion concepts, and emergent themes were identified.

Results

Both PCP and layperson participants felt the that benefits of MCDs included ease of use and potential ability to detect cancers early. However, they felt that additional data is needed to overcome some of the concerns related to MCDs. PCP participants expressed concerns related to lack of practice guidelines, cost of diagnostic follow-ups, privacy and insurance issues, fear/anxiety related to confirmation of MCD results, and malpractice liability related to perceived false negative test results. Layperson participants expressed concerns related to costs, insurance coverage, and privacy, as well as anxiety over the confirmation of a positive test result.

Conclusions

There is a major need for more rigorous data regarding MCDs to inform the development of guidelines for use as cancer screening tools.

查看原文本刊更多论文

初级保健医生和普通人对多发性癌症检测的看法：定性研究。

导言：多种癌症检测试验（MCD）是一种基于血液的试验，旨在检测多种癌症类型。目前还不清楚这些癌症筛查试验是否能提高死亡率。为了了解医疗服务提供者和患者对多癌检测的认识，并探讨他们如何看待多癌检测的益处、危害和可接受性，我们对初级保健医生（PCP）和非专业人士进行了一项焦点小组研究，以探讨他们对使用多癌检测进行癌症筛查的认识、态度和期望：方法：我们进行了六次焦点小组讨论，共有 45 名初级保健医生参加，并进行了 12 次焦点小组讨论，共有 80 名非专业人士参加。参与者是通过一家消费者研究公司确定的，并在完成筛选器调查后被认定符合条件。主持人使用包含开放式问题和提示的半结构化指南来促进讨论。根据问题和新出现的讨论概念编制了编码手册，逐行对录音进行转录和编码，并确定了新出现的主题：结果：初级保健医生和非专业人士都认为，MCDs 的优点包括使用方便和早期发现癌症的潜在能力。但是，他们认为需要更多的数据来克服与 MCD 相关的一些顾虑。初级保健医生与会者表达了与缺乏实践指南、诊断随访成本、隐私和保险问题、与确认 MCD 结果有关的恐惧/焦虑以及与假阴性检测结果有关的医疗事故责任相关的担忧。非专业参与者则表达了对成本、保险范围和隐私的担忧，以及对确认阳性检测结果的焦虑：我们亟需更多有关 MCD 的严谨数据，以便为癌症筛查工具指南的制定提供参考。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cancer Medicine ONCOLOGY-

CiteScore

5.50

自引率

2.50%

发文量

907

审稿时长

19 weeks

期刊介绍： Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas: Clinical Cancer Research Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations Cancer Biology: Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery. Cancer Prevention: Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach. Bioinformatics: Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers. Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.