A Randomized Trial of Two Remote Healthcare Delivery Models on the Uptake of Genetic Testing and Impact on Patient-Reported Psychological Outcomes in Families With Pancreatic Cancer: The Genetic Education, Risk Assessment, and Testing (GENERATE) Study
Nicolette J. Rodriguez,C. Sloane Furniss,Matthew B. Yurgelun,Chinedu Ukaegbu,Pamela E. Constantinou,Ileana Fortes,Alyson Caruso,Alison N. Schwartz,Jill E. Stopfer,Meghan Underhill-Blazey,Barbara Kenner,Scott H. Nelson,Sydney Okumura,Alicia Y. Zhou,Tara B. Coffin,Hajime Uno,Miki Horiguchi,Allyson J. Ocean,Florencia McAllister,Andrew M. Lowy,Alison P. Klein,Lisa Madlensky,Gloria M. Petersen,Judy E. Garber,Scott M. Lippman,Michael G. Goggins,Anirban Maitra,Sapna Syngal
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2024.01.042
IF: 29.4
2024-02-07
Gastroenterology
Abstract:Background and Aims Genetic testing uptake for cancer susceptibility in family members of cancer patients is suboptimal. Among relatives of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients, The GENetic Education, Risk Assessment, and TEsting (GENERATE) study evaluated two online genetic education/testing delivery models and their impact on patient-reported psychological outcomes (PRPOs). Methods Eligible participants had ≥1 first-degree relative with PDAC, or ≥1 first-/second-degree relative with PDAC with a known pathogenic germline variant in one of thirteen PDAC predisposition genes. Participants were randomized by family, between 5/8/2019-6/1/2021. Arm 1 participants underwent a remote interactive telemedicine session and online genetic education. Arm 2 participants were offered online genetic education only. All participants were offered germline testing. The primary outcome was genetic testing uptake, compared by permutation tests and mixed-effects logistic regression models. We hypothesized that Arm 1 participants would have a higher genetic testing uptake than Arm 2. Validated surveys were administered to assess patient-reported anxiety, depression, and cancer worry at baseline and 3-months post-intervention. Results 424 families were randomized, including 601 participants (n=296 Arm 1; n=305 Arm 2), 90% of whom completed genetic testing (Arm 1 (87%); Arm 2 (93%), p=0.014). Arm 1 participants were significantly less likely to complete genetic testing compared to Arm 2 (adjusted ratio (Arm1/Arm2) 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98). Among participants who completed PRPO questionnaires (Arm 1 (n=194); Arm 2 (n=206)), the intervention did not impact mean anxiety, depression or cancer worry scores. Conclusions Remote genetic education and testing can be a successful and complementary option for delivering genetics care.
gastroenterology & hepatology