在初级保健中使用多基因评分估算常见癌症风险的可接受性和临床影响:系统性综述。

IF 1.5 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Journal of Community Genetics Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-21 DOI:10.1007/s12687-024-00709-8
Faye C Dannhauser, Lily C Taylor, Joanna S L Tung, Juliet A Usher-Smith
{"title":"在初级保健中使用多基因评分估算常见癌症风险的可接受性和临床影响:系统性综述。","authors":"Faye C Dannhauser, Lily C Taylor, Joanna S L Tung, Juliet A Usher-Smith","doi":"10.1007/s12687-024-00709-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polygenic scores (PGS) have been developed for cancer risk-estimation and show potential as tools to prompt earlier referral for high-risk individuals and aid risk-stratification within cancer screening programmes. This review explores the potential for using PGS to identify individuals at risk of the most common cancers seen in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two electronic databases were searched up until November 2023 to identify quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that reported on the acceptability and clinical impact of using PGS to identify individuals at highest risk of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer in primary care. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of included studies and a narrative synthesis was used to analyse data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 190 papers were identified, 18 of which were eligible for inclusion. A cancer risk-assessment tool incorporating PGS was acceptable to the general practice population and their healthcare providers but major challenges to implementation were identified, including lack of evidence for PGS in non-European ancestry and a need for healthcare provider education in genomic medicine. A PGS cancer risk-assessment had relatively limited impact on psychosocial outcomes and health behaviours. However, for prostate cancer, potential applications for its use in primary care were shown.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cancer risk assessment incorporating PGS in primary care is acceptable to patients and healthcare providers but there is a paucity of research exploring clinical impact. Few studies were identified, and more research is required before clinical implementation of PGS can be recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"217-234"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11217210/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The acceptability and clinical impact of using polygenic scores for risk-estimation of common cancers in primary care: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Faye C Dannhauser, Lily C Taylor, Joanna S L Tung, Juliet A Usher-Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12687-024-00709-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polygenic scores (PGS) have been developed for cancer risk-estimation and show potential as tools to prompt earlier referral for high-risk individuals and aid risk-stratification within cancer screening programmes. This review explores the potential for using PGS to identify individuals at risk of the most common cancers seen in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two electronic databases were searched up until November 2023 to identify quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that reported on the acceptability and clinical impact of using PGS to identify individuals at highest risk of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer in primary care. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of included studies and a narrative synthesis was used to analyse data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 190 papers were identified, 18 of which were eligible for inclusion. A cancer risk-assessment tool incorporating PGS was acceptable to the general practice population and their healthcare providers but major challenges to implementation were identified, including lack of evidence for PGS in non-European ancestry and a need for healthcare provider education in genomic medicine. A PGS cancer risk-assessment had relatively limited impact on psychosocial outcomes and health behaviours. However, for prostate cancer, potential applications for its use in primary care were shown.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cancer risk assessment incorporating PGS in primary care is acceptable to patients and healthcare providers but there is a paucity of research exploring clinical impact. Few studies were identified, and more research is required before clinical implementation of PGS can be recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"217-234\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11217210/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-024-00709-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-024-00709-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:多基因评分(PGS)已被开发用于癌症风险估计,并显示出作为工具的潜力,可促使高危人群尽早转诊并帮助癌症筛查计划中的风险分级。本综述探讨了使用 PGS 识别基层医疗机构中最常见癌症风险个体的潜力:方法:检索了两个电子数据库,截止日期为 2023 年 11 月,以确定定量、定性和混合方法研究,这些研究报告了在初级医疗中使用 PGS 识别乳腺癌、前列腺癌、结直肠癌和肺癌高危人群的可接受性和临床影响。混合方法评估工具(MMAT)用于评估纳入研究的质量,叙事综合法用于分析数据:结果:共发现 190 篇论文,其中 18 篇符合纳入条件。纳入 PGS 的癌症风险评估工具可为全科医生及其医疗服务提供者所接受,但也发现了实施过程中的主要挑战,包括缺乏非欧洲血统 PGS 的证据,以及医疗服务提供者需要接受基因组医学教育。PGS 癌症风险评估对社会心理结果和健康行为的影响相对有限。然而,对于前列腺癌而言,其在初级保健中的潜在应用已经显现:结论:在初级医疗中纳入 PGS 的癌症风险评估可为患者和医疗服务提供者所接受,但探讨其临床影响的研究却很少。已确定的研究很少,在建议临床实施 PGS 之前还需要进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The acceptability and clinical impact of using polygenic scores for risk-estimation of common cancers in primary care: a systematic review.

Background: Polygenic scores (PGS) have been developed for cancer risk-estimation and show potential as tools to prompt earlier referral for high-risk individuals and aid risk-stratification within cancer screening programmes. This review explores the potential for using PGS to identify individuals at risk of the most common cancers seen in primary care.

Methods: Two electronic databases were searched up until November 2023 to identify quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies that reported on the acceptability and clinical impact of using PGS to identify individuals at highest risk of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer in primary care. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of included studies and a narrative synthesis was used to analyse data.

Results: A total of 190 papers were identified, 18 of which were eligible for inclusion. A cancer risk-assessment tool incorporating PGS was acceptable to the general practice population and their healthcare providers but major challenges to implementation were identified, including lack of evidence for PGS in non-European ancestry and a need for healthcare provider education in genomic medicine. A PGS cancer risk-assessment had relatively limited impact on psychosocial outcomes and health behaviours. However, for prostate cancer, potential applications for its use in primary care were shown.

Conclusions: Cancer risk assessment incorporating PGS in primary care is acceptable to patients and healthcare providers but there is a paucity of research exploring clinical impact. Few studies were identified, and more research is required before clinical implementation of PGS can be recommended.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Community Genetics
Journal of Community Genetics GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals. Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues. The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries. The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.
×
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