Physicians' Attitudes About Multiplex Tumor Genomic Testing

被引:182
作者
Gray, Stacy W. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hicks-Courant, Katherine [4 ]
Cronin, Angel [1 ]
Rollins, Barrett J. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Weeks, Jane C. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Boston, MA USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Univ Massachusetts, Sch Med, Worcester, MA USA
关键词
CANCER RECURRENCE RISK; GENETIC RESEARCH; NATIONAL-SURVEY; SUSCEPTIBILITY; MEDICINE; RETURN; LUNG; CARE;
D O I
10.1200/JCO.2013.52.4298
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose Although predictive multiplex somatic genomic tests hold the potential to transform care by identifying targetable alterations in multiple cancer genes, little is known about how physicians will use such tests in practice. Participants and Methods Before the initiation of enterprise-wide multiplex testing at a major cancer center, we surveyed all clinically active adult cancer physicians to assess their current use of somatic testing, their attitudes about multiplex testing, and their genomic confidence. Results A total of 160 physicians participated (response rate, 61%): 57% were medical oncologists; 29%, surgeons; 14% radiation oncologists; 37%, women; and 83%, research principal investigators. Twenty-two percent of physicians reported low confidence in their genomic knowledge. Eighteen percent of physicians anticipated testing patients infrequently (<= 10%), whereas 25% anticipate testing most patients (>= 90%). Higher genomic confidence was associated with wanting to test a majority of patients (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 6.09; 95% CI, 2.1 to 17.5) and anticipating using actionable (adjusted OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.2 to 5.2) or potentially actionable (adjusted OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.9) test results to inform treatment recommendations. Forty-two percent of physicians endorsed disclosure of uncertain genomic findings to patients. Conclusion Physicians at a tertiary-care National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center varied considerably in how they planned to incorporate predictive multiplex somatic genomic tests into practice and in their attitudes about the disclosure of genomic information of uncertain significance. Given that many physicians reported low genomic confidence, evidence-based guidelines and enhanced physician genomic education efforts may be needed to ensure that genomically guided cancer care is adequately delivered.
引用
收藏
页码:1317 / +
页数:12
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [1] Whole Genome Scanning: Resolving Clinical Diagnosis and Management Amidst Complex Data
    Ali-Khan, Sarah E.
    Daar, Abdallah S.
    Shuman, Cheryl
    Ray, Peter N.
    Scherer, Stephen W.
    [J]. PEDIATRIC RESEARCH, 2009, 66 (04) : 357 - 363
  • [2] American Association for Public Opinion Research, 2011, STAND DEF FIN DISP C
  • [3] Buchanan JA, 2008, GENET MED, V10, P639, DOI 10.1097GIM.0b013e318183f848
  • [4] Improved Survival with Vemurafenib in Melanoma with BRAF V600E Mutation
    Chapman, Paul B.
    Hauschild, Axel
    Robert, Caroline
    Haanen, John B.
    Ascierto, Paolo
    Larkin, James
    Dummer, Reinhard
    Garbe, Claus
    Testori, Alessandro
    Maio, Michele
    Hogg, David
    Lorigan, Paul
    Lebbe, Celeste
    Jouary, Thomas
    Schadendorf, Dirk
    Ribas, Antoni
    O'Day, Steven J.
    Sosman, Jeffrey A.
    Kirkwood, John M.
    Eggermont, Alexander M. M.
    Dreno, Brigitte
    Nolop, Keith
    Li, Jiang
    Nelson, Betty
    Hou, Jeannie
    Lee, Richard J.
    Flaherty, Keith T.
    McArthur, Grant A.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2011, 364 (26) : 2507 - 2516
  • [5] Uptake of KRAS mutation testing in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Europe, Latin America and Asia
    Ciardiello, Fortunato
    Tejpar, Sabine
    Normanno, Nicola
    Mercadante, Domenica
    Teague, Tracey
    Wohlschlegel, Bruno
    Van Cutsem, Eric
    [J]. TARGETED ONCOLOGY, 2011, 6 (03) : 133 - 145
  • [6] Patterns of Cancer Genetic Testing: A Randomized Survey of Oregon Clinicians
    Cox, Summer L.
    Zlot, Amy I.
    Silvey, Kerry
    Elliott, Debi
    Horn, Tara
    Johnson, Amber
    Leman, Richard F.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 2012
  • [7] Return of results: not that complicated?
    Evans, James P.
    Rothschild, Barbra B.
    [J]. GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 14 (04) : 358 - 360
  • [8] Ethical and Practical Guidelines for Reporting Genetic Research Results to Study Participants Updated Guidelines From a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group
    Fabsitz, Richard R.
    McGuire, Amy
    Sharp, Richard R.
    Puggal, Mona
    Beskow, Laura M.
    Biesecker, Leslie G.
    Bookman, Ebony
    Burke, Wylie
    Burchard, Esteban Gonzalez
    Church, George
    Clayton, Ellen Wright
    Eckfeldt, John H.
    Fernandez, Conrad V.
    Fisher, Rebecca
    Fullerton, Stephanie M.
    Gabriel, Stacey
    Gachupin, Francine
    James, Cynthia
    Jarvik, Gail P.
    Kittles, Rick
    Leib, Jennifer R.
    O'Donnell, Christopher
    O'Rourke, P. Pearl
    Rodriguez, Laura Lyman
    Schully, Sheri D.
    Shuldiner, Alan R.
    Sze, Rebecca K. F.
    Thakuria, Joseph V.
    Wolf, Susan M.
    Burke, Gregory L.
    [J]. CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR GENETICS, 2010, 3 (06) : 574 - 580
  • [9] A Reasoned Action Approach to Health Promotion
    Fishbein, Martin
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 28 (06) : 834 - 844
  • [10] US physicians' attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer susceptibility
    Freedman, AN
    Wideroff, L
    Olson, L
    Davis, W
    Klabunde, C
    Srinath, KP
    Reeve, BB
    Croyle, RT
    Ballard-Barbash, R
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A, 2003, 120A (01): : 63 - 71