Inadequacies in genetic testing referrals and counseling in prostate cancer.

Authors

null

Yash Suri

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Yash Suri, Lakshminarayanan Nandagopal, Arnab Basu

Organizations

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Hoover, AL

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Recent studies have recognized the high prevalence of germline mutations in genes affecting DNA repair in patients with prostate cancer. In recognition of their growing clinical significance, the NCCN guidelines recommend genetic counselling in prostate cancer pts with certain risk factors. The application of these guidelines in clinical practice were evaluated. Methods: All new clinic visits of prostate cancer pts at UAB from January 2019 – June 2019 were identified and analyzed. We constructed a flow diagram of the UAB two-step referral model, and performed a chart review and analyzed the new clinic visits. We then sent a 10-item questionnaire to providers at UAB to collect information on germline genetic testing patterns, general approach to testing, and the barriers of GC, and actions to overcome barriers. Results: From January to June 2019, 57 new prostate cancer patients were seen, of which 23 had metastatic disease, 20 had high or intermediate risk localized disease and remaining had biochemical recurrence. In total, 38 had an indication for GC. The most common indication was metastatic disease in 23 pts (40%) and localized high risk in 15 pts (26%). Significantly 33% of 24 patients with early onset prostate cancer < 60 yrs did not meet NCCN defined criteria for testing. Only 39% of the 38 eligible patients were referred, with testing completed in 11% of those with indications. The response rate to the survey was 91%. 30% of respondents reported that they would be comfortable completing genetic counseling themselves, and the most commonly reported barrier to providing the testing themselves was time, and lack of expertise/experience. 70% percent of providers cited that lack of genetics workforce was a barrier to genetic testing, and 60% cited lack of knowledge of genetic testing and genetics and the inadequate coordination of referrals were barriers. Conclusions: While a majority of prostate cancer patients seen in the oncology clinic meet criteria for GC, referrals are inconsistent, and only a handful of eligible patients complete testing. From the survey results, the areas that need to be improved from the provider’s side are education and comfort with genetic testing. From a systems perspective, the need for more genetics workforce, and better process workflows are required to improve the uptake of Genetic Testing Referral and Testing. The interventions of practice transformation and education need to be implemented, and tested at UAB to improve adherence to the NCCN guidelines for genetic testing of prostate cancer.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

On-Demand Poster Session: Cost, Value, and Policy

Track

Cost, Value, and Policy

Sub Track

Organizational and Operational Issues

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 29; abstr 43)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.38.29_suppl.43

Abstract #

43

Poster Bd #

Online Only

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2022 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Impact of provider education on prostate cancer genetic counseling referrals.

First Author: Emily Moody

First Author: Lisa DiMartino

First Author: Huma Q. Rana