AI Article Synopsis

  • Multigene panels (MGPs) are becoming popular for cancer genetic testing, but their clinical benefits and counseling practices remain unclear.
  • A study involving 395 patients found that MGP testing was more commonly offered to individuals with a history of cancer and those without a family mutation, and it correlated with reduced anxiety and depression prior to result disclosure.
  • Overall, while MGP testing was linked to favorable patient outcomes, it also led to increased uncertainty compared to traditional targeted testing methods.

Article Abstract

Purpose: Multigene panels (MGPs) are increasingly being used despite questions regarding their clinical utility and no standard approach to genetic counseling. How frequently genetic providers use MGP testing and how patient-reported outcomes (PROs) differ from targeted testing (eg, only) are unknown.

Methods: We evaluated use of MGP testing and PROs in participants undergoing cancer genetic testing in the multicenter Communication of Genetic Test Results by Telephone study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ), a randomized study of telephone versus in-person disclosure of genetic test results. PROs included genetic knowledge, general and state anxiety, depression, cancer-specific distress, uncertainty, and satisfaction. Genetic providers offered targeted or MGP testing based on clinical assessment.

Results: Since the inclusion of MGP testing in 2014, 395 patients (66%) were offered MGP testing. MGP testing increased over time from 57% in 2014 to 66% in 2015 ( = .02) and varied by site (46% to 78%; < .01). Being offered MGP testing was significantly associated with not having Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry, having a history of cancer, not having a mutation in the family, not having made a treatment decision, and study site. After demographic adjustment, patients offered MGP testing had lower general anxiety ( = .04), state anxiety ( = .03), depression ( = .04), and uncertainty ( = .05) pre-disclosure compared with patients offered targeted testing. State anxiety ( = .05) and cancer-specific distress ( = .05) were lower at disclosure in the MGP group. There was a greater increase in change in uncertainty ( = .04) among patients who underwent MGP testing.

Conclusion: MGP testing was more frequently offered to patients with lower anxiety, depression, and uncertainty and was associated with favorable outcomes, with the exception of a greater increase in uncertainty compared with patients who had targeted testing. Addressing uncertainty may be important as MGP testing is increasingly adopted.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6901130PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/PO.18.00199DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

mgp testing
40
testing
15
genetic test
12
mgp
12
targeted testing
12
state anxiety
12
anxiety depression
12
offered mgp
12
patient-reported outcomes
8
multicenter communication
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!