Expanding Germline Hereditary Cancer Gene Panel Testing by Nongenetics Providers: 3-Year Experience in Large Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Trevor L Hoffman, Farah M Brasfield, Devansu Tewari, Jeffery D Greenberg, Hilary B Kershberg, John Goff, Reina Haque, Monica Alvarado
{"title":"Expanding Germline Hereditary Cancer Gene Panel Testing by Nongenetics Providers: 3-Year Experience in Large Integrated Health Care Delivery System.","authors":"Trevor L Hoffman, Farah M Brasfield, Devansu Tewari, Jeffery D Greenberg, Hilary B Kershberg, John Goff, Reina Haque, Monica Alvarado","doi":"10.1200/OP-24-00717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Demand for germline hereditary cancer genetic testing has increased because of reduced cost, gene discovery, expanding indications, and precision cancer therapies. The traditional model for germline testing, where a genetics provider performs all steps of the testing process (pretest counseling, test ordering, results disclosure, and post-test counseling), is no longer able to meet testing needs especially for patients with cancer needing timely germline testing for treatment decisions. Mainstreaming has emerged as an alternative approach to increase testing capacity and efficiency, where nongenetics providers perform these steps and genetics providers focus on post-test counseling for positive results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study reports a 3-year experience with mainstreaming hereditary cancer gene panel testing at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The study compared demographic characteristics, cancer diagnoses, and test results between patients tested by genetics providers (traditional model) versus nongenetics providers (mainstreaming) over 3 years. Over 32,000 germline hereditary cancer gene panels were completed, including nearly 12,000 mainstreaming tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mainstreaming substantially increased testing volume. Patients undergoing mainstream testing were more likely to have cancer, be male, and self-report being Asian or Black. The positive test rate was slightly lower in the mainstreaming group (11%) compared with the traditional testing model (15%), with similar rates of variants of uncertain significance. Post-test genetic counseling was high in both groups for positive results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates that mainstreaming can be successfully implemented in a large health care system and significantly expand testing capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2400717"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-24-00717","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Demand for germline hereditary cancer genetic testing has increased because of reduced cost, gene discovery, expanding indications, and precision cancer therapies. The traditional model for germline testing, where a genetics provider performs all steps of the testing process (pretest counseling, test ordering, results disclosure, and post-test counseling), is no longer able to meet testing needs especially for patients with cancer needing timely germline testing for treatment decisions. Mainstreaming has emerged as an alternative approach to increase testing capacity and efficiency, where nongenetics providers perform these steps and genetics providers focus on post-test counseling for positive results.

Methods: This study reports a 3-year experience with mainstreaming hereditary cancer gene panel testing at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The study compared demographic characteristics, cancer diagnoses, and test results between patients tested by genetics providers (traditional model) versus nongenetics providers (mainstreaming) over 3 years. Over 32,000 germline hereditary cancer gene panels were completed, including nearly 12,000 mainstreaming tests.

Results: Mainstreaming substantially increased testing volume. Patients undergoing mainstream testing were more likely to have cancer, be male, and self-report being Asian or Black. The positive test rate was slightly lower in the mainstreaming group (11%) compared with the traditional testing model (15%), with similar rates of variants of uncertain significance. Post-test genetic counseling was high in both groups for positive results.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that mainstreaming can be successfully implemented in a large health care system and significantly expand testing capacity.

扩大生殖系遗传性癌症基因面板测试的非遗传学提供者:3年的经验,在大型综合医疗保健服务系统。
目的:由于成本降低、基因发现、适应症扩大和精确癌症治疗,对生殖系遗传性癌症基因检测的需求增加。传统的生殖细胞检测模式,即遗传学提供者执行检测过程的所有步骤(测试前咨询、测试订购、结果披露和测试后咨询),不再能够满足检测需求,特别是对于需要及时进行生殖细胞检测以做出治疗决定的癌症患者。主流化已经成为提高检测能力和效率的另一种方法,非遗传学提供者执行这些步骤,遗传学提供者专注于检测后的积极结果咨询。方法:本研究报告了在南加州凯撒医疗机构主流化遗传癌症基因面板检测的3年经验。该研究比较了3年来由遗传学提供者(传统模式)和非遗传学提供者(主流模式)检测的患者的人口学特征、癌症诊断和检测结果。完成了32 000多个生殖系遗传癌症基因小组,包括近12 000个主流化测试。结果:主流化大大增加了测试量。接受主流检测的患者更有可能患癌症,是男性,并且自我报告是亚洲人或黑人。与传统检测模型(15%)相比,主流组的阳性检测率(11%)略低,具有不确定意义的变异率相似。检测后的遗传咨询在阳性结果的两组中都很高。结论:本研究表明,主流化可以在大型卫生保健系统中成功实施,并显著扩大检测能力。
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
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信