What would I do? Perspectives on the factors underlying Lynch syndrome genetic testing and results sharing decisions for high-risk colorectal cancer patients.

Psycho-Oncology Pub Date : 2022-04-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-08 DOI:10.1002/pon.5840
Gabriella Tiernan, Victoria Freeman, April Morrow, Emily Hogden, Karen Canfell, Yoon-Jung Kang, Natalie Taylor
{"title":"What would I do? Perspectives on the factors underlying Lynch syndrome genetic testing and results sharing decisions for high-risk colorectal cancer patients.","authors":"Gabriella Tiernan,&nbsp;Victoria Freeman,&nbsp;April Morrow,&nbsp;Emily Hogden,&nbsp;Karen Canfell,&nbsp;Yoon-Jung Kang,&nbsp;Natalie Taylor","doi":"10.1002/pon.5840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Universal tumour testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in all incident colorectal cancers (CRCs) and sequential diagnostic genetic testing is cost-effective in Australia. Because of this, our study aimed to understand factors underlying possible decisions faced by tumour test-positive CRC patients and their at-risk relatives throughout the LS diagnosis pathway.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 23 participants, using four hypothetical scenarios. Vignette-guided closed- and open-ended questions asked about LS genetic testing uptake, discussing diagnosis with at-risk relatives, and risk-reducing interventions. Personal perspectives on genetic testing were collected pre-post vignette discussion. Inductive thematic analysis was performed on open-ended questions. Decisional pathway diagrams were developed to convey factors influencing complex decision-making processes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participant responses incorporated unfolding scenario information, resulting in three decision themes: (1) wanting to know one's LS status; (2) informing family about LS; (3) navigating risk-reducing interventions. Across all themes, 'knowledge' emerged as a facilitator, and 'negative emotional experience' as a barrier. Personal supportive views toward genetic testing increased post-interview.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When communicating with tumour test-positive CRC patients or their relatives about LS genetic testing, providing guidance/resources to inform decisions around risk-reducing interventions and informing family members is critical. Scenario-driven interviews provide insight into what individuals might do when facing complex healthcare decisions and could aid informed decision-making. This approach may be applicable in other conditions, particularly with mainstreaming being increasingly introduced into the genetic context.</p>","PeriodicalId":516935,"journal":{"name":"Psycho-Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"587-596"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9298871/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho-Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Objective: Universal tumour testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) in all incident colorectal cancers (CRCs) and sequential diagnostic genetic testing is cost-effective in Australia. Because of this, our study aimed to understand factors underlying possible decisions faced by tumour test-positive CRC patients and their at-risk relatives throughout the LS diagnosis pathway.

Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 23 participants, using four hypothetical scenarios. Vignette-guided closed- and open-ended questions asked about LS genetic testing uptake, discussing diagnosis with at-risk relatives, and risk-reducing interventions. Personal perspectives on genetic testing were collected pre-post vignette discussion. Inductive thematic analysis was performed on open-ended questions. Decisional pathway diagrams were developed to convey factors influencing complex decision-making processes.

Results: Participant responses incorporated unfolding scenario information, resulting in three decision themes: (1) wanting to know one's LS status; (2) informing family about LS; (3) navigating risk-reducing interventions. Across all themes, 'knowledge' emerged as a facilitator, and 'negative emotional experience' as a barrier. Personal supportive views toward genetic testing increased post-interview.

Conclusions: When communicating with tumour test-positive CRC patients or their relatives about LS genetic testing, providing guidance/resources to inform decisions around risk-reducing interventions and informing family members is critical. Scenario-driven interviews provide insight into what individuals might do when facing complex healthcare decisions and could aid informed decision-making. This approach may be applicable in other conditions, particularly with mainstreaming being increasingly introduced into the genetic context.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

我该怎么办?高危结直肠癌患者Lynch综合征基因检测的潜在因素及结果共享决策的观点。
目的:在澳大利亚,所有结直肠癌(crc)中Lynch综合征(LS)的普遍肿瘤检测和序列诊断基因检测具有成本效益。正因为如此,我们的研究旨在了解肿瘤检测阳性的CRC患者及其高危亲属在LS诊断过程中可能面临的决策的潜在因素。方法:采用半结构化的电话访谈,对23名参与者进行了四种假设情景的访谈。vignette引导的封闭式和开放式问题涉及LS基因检测的吸收,与有风险的亲属讨论诊断,以及降低风险的干预措施。个人对基因检测的看法收集了前后小插曲的讨论。对开放性问题进行归纳主题分析。制定决策路径图来传达影响复杂决策过程的因素。结果:参与者的反应包含了展开情景信息,产生了三个决策主题:(1)想要知道自己的LS状态;(2)告知家属LS;(3)引导降低风险的干预措施。在所有的主题中,“知识”是一种促进因素,而“负面情绪体验”是一种障碍。个人支持基因检测的观点在访谈后增加。结论:在与肿瘤检测阳性的结直肠癌患者或其亲属沟通LS基因检测时,提供指导/资源以告知有关降低风险干预措施的决策并告知家庭成员至关重要。场景驱动型访谈可以深入了解个人在面临复杂的医疗保健决策时可能会做什么,并有助于做出明智的决策。这种方法可能适用于其他情况,特别是随着主流化越来越多地被引入遗传环境。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信