Callan D Russell, Ashley V Daley, Durand R Van Arnem, Andi V Hila, Kiley J Johnson, Jill N Davies, Hanah S Cytron, Kaylene J Ready, Cary M Armstrong, Mark E Sylvester, Colleen A Caleshu
{"title":"验证基于指南的数字工具,以评估是否需要进行种系癌症基因检测。","authors":"Callan D Russell, Ashley V Daley, Durand R Van Arnem, Andi V Hila, Kiley J Johnson, Jill N Davies, Hanah S Cytron, Kaylene J Ready, Cary M Armstrong, Mark E Sylvester, Colleen A Caleshu","doi":"10.1186/s13053-024-00298-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Efficient and scalable solutions are needed to identify patients who qualify for germline cancer genetic testing. We evaluated the clinical validity of a brief, patient-administered hereditary cancer risk assessment digital tool programmed to assess if patients meet criteria for germline genetic testing, based on personal and family history, and in line with national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied the tool to cases seen in a nationwide telehealth genetic counseling practice. Validity of the tool was evaluated by comparing the tool's assessment to that of the genetic counselor who saw the patient. Patients' histories were extracted from genetic counselor-collected pedigrees and input into the tool by the research team to model how a patient would complete the tool. We also validated the tool's assessment of which specific aspects of the personal and family history met criteria for genetic testing. Descriptive statistics were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 152 cases (80% female, mean age 52.3), 56% had a personal history of cancer and 66% met genetic testing criteria. The tool and genetic counselor agreed in 96% of cases. Most disagreements (4/6; 67%) occurred because the genetic counselor's assessment relied on details the tool was not programmed to collect since patients typically don't have access to the relevant information (pathology details, risk models). We also found complete agreement between the tool and research team on which specific aspects of the patient's history met criteria for genetic testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We observed a high level of agreement with genetic counselor assessments, affirming the tool's clinical validity in identifying individuals for hereditary cancer predisposition testing and its potential for increasing access to hereditary cancer risk assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":55058,"journal":{"name":"Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice","volume":"22 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11545665/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of a guidelines-based digital tool to assess the need for germline cancer genetic testing.\",\"authors\":\"Callan D Russell, Ashley V Daley, Durand R Van Arnem, Andi V Hila, Kiley J Johnson, Jill N Davies, Hanah S Cytron, Kaylene J Ready, Cary M Armstrong, Mark E Sylvester, Colleen A Caleshu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13053-024-00298-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Efficient and scalable solutions are needed to identify patients who qualify for germline cancer genetic testing. We evaluated the clinical validity of a brief, patient-administered hereditary cancer risk assessment digital tool programmed to assess if patients meet criteria for germline genetic testing, based on personal and family history, and in line with national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied the tool to cases seen in a nationwide telehealth genetic counseling practice. Validity of the tool was evaluated by comparing the tool's assessment to that of the genetic counselor who saw the patient. Patients' histories were extracted from genetic counselor-collected pedigrees and input into the tool by the research team to model how a patient would complete the tool. We also validated the tool's assessment of which specific aspects of the personal and family history met criteria for genetic testing. Descriptive statistics were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 152 cases (80% female, mean age 52.3), 56% had a personal history of cancer and 66% met genetic testing criteria. The tool and genetic counselor agreed in 96% of cases. Most disagreements (4/6; 67%) occurred because the genetic counselor's assessment relied on details the tool was not programmed to collect since patients typically don't have access to the relevant information (pathology details, risk models). We also found complete agreement between the tool and research team on which specific aspects of the patient's history met criteria for genetic testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We observed a high level of agreement with genetic counselor assessments, affirming the tool's clinical validity in identifying individuals for hereditary cancer predisposition testing and its potential for increasing access to hereditary cancer risk assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11545665/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13053-024-00298-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13053-024-00298-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of a guidelines-based digital tool to assess the need for germline cancer genetic testing.
Background: Efficient and scalable solutions are needed to identify patients who qualify for germline cancer genetic testing. We evaluated the clinical validity of a brief, patient-administered hereditary cancer risk assessment digital tool programmed to assess if patients meet criteria for germline genetic testing, based on personal and family history, and in line with national guidelines.
Methods: We applied the tool to cases seen in a nationwide telehealth genetic counseling practice. Validity of the tool was evaluated by comparing the tool's assessment to that of the genetic counselor who saw the patient. Patients' histories were extracted from genetic counselor-collected pedigrees and input into the tool by the research team to model how a patient would complete the tool. We also validated the tool's assessment of which specific aspects of the personal and family history met criteria for genetic testing. Descriptive statistics were used.
Results: Of the 152 cases (80% female, mean age 52.3), 56% had a personal history of cancer and 66% met genetic testing criteria. The tool and genetic counselor agreed in 96% of cases. Most disagreements (4/6; 67%) occurred because the genetic counselor's assessment relied on details the tool was not programmed to collect since patients typically don't have access to the relevant information (pathology details, risk models). We also found complete agreement between the tool and research team on which specific aspects of the patient's history met criteria for genetic testing.
Conclusion: We observed a high level of agreement with genetic counselor assessments, affirming the tool's clinical validity in identifying individuals for hereditary cancer predisposition testing and its potential for increasing access to hereditary cancer risk assessment.
期刊介绍:
Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice is an open access journal that publishes articles of interest for the cancer genetics community and serves as a discussion forum for the development appropriate healthcare strategies.
Cancer genetics encompasses a wide variety of disciplines and knowledge in the field is rapidly growing, especially as the amount of information linking genetic differences to inherited cancer predispositions continues expanding. With the increased knowledge of genetic variability and how this relates to cancer risk there is a growing demand not only to disseminate this information into clinical practice but also to enable competent debate concerning how such information is managed and what it implies for patient care.
Topics covered by the journal include but are not limited to:
Original research articles on any aspect of inherited predispositions to cancer.
Reviews of inherited cancer predispositions.
Application of molecular and cytogenetic analysis to clinical decision making.
Clinical aspects of the management of hereditary cancers.
Genetic counselling issues associated with cancer genetics.
The role of registries in improving health care of patients with an inherited predisposition to cancer.