Community oncologists\u27 perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing.

PURPOSE: Large-panel genomic tumor testing (GTT) is an emerging technology with great promise but uncertain clinical value. Previous research has documented variability in academic oncologists\u27 perceptions and use of GTT, but little is known about community oncologists\u27 perceptions of GTT and how perceptions relate to clinicians\u27 intentions to use GTT. METHODS: Community oncology physicians (N = 58) participating in a statewide initiative aimed at improving access to large-panel GTT completed surveys assessing their confidence in using GTT, attitudes regarding the value of GTT, perceptions of barriers to GTT implementation, and future intentions to use GTTs. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to characterize these perceptions and to explore the relationships between them. RESULTS: There was substantial variability in clinicians\u27 perceptions of GTT. Clinicians generally had moderate confidence in their ability to use GTT, but lower confidence in patients\u27 ability to understand test results and access targeted treatment. Clinicians had positive attitudes regarding the value of GTT. Clinicians\u27 future intentions to use GTT were associated with greater confidence in using GTT and greater perceived barriers to implementing GTT, but not with attitudes about the value of GTT. CONCLUSIONS: Community oncologists\u27 perceptions of large-panel genomic tumor testing are variable, and their future intentions to use GTT are associated with both their confidence in and perceived barriers to its use, but not with their attitudes towards GTT. More research is needed to understand other factors that determine how oncologists perceive and use GTT in clinical practice

Differences in cancer patients\u27 and clinicians\u27 preferences for disclosure of uncertain genomic tumor testing results.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinicians\u27 and patients\u27 preferences for disclosure of genomic tumor testing (GTT) results; to determine the sensitivity of these disclosure preferences to uncertainty about the actionability of results; and to explore factors associated with disclosure preferences. METHODS: Community-based oncology clinicians (n = 94) and patients (n = 1121) were surveyed about their preferences for disclosing GTT results with varying levels of uncertainty (Tiers 1, 2, 3). Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were used to compare clinicians\u27 and patients\u27 disclosure preferences and their sensitivity to uncertainty, and to explore associations between disclosure preferences and sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological factors. RESULTS: Relatively more patients than clinicians preferred disclosure, and their preferences were less sensitive to the uncertainty of GTT results. For patients and clinicians, lower uncertainty sensitivity was associated with positive GTT attitudes; for patients it was also associated with greater uncertainty tolerance and knowledge of uncertainty in GTT. CONCLUSION: Relatively more cancer patients than clinicians prefer disclosure of GTT results, and their preferences are less sensitive to result uncertainty. Uncertainty sensitivity in disclosure preferences is associated with GTT-related attitudes and uncertainty tolerance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Differences in cancer patients\u27 and clinicians\u27 preferences for disclosure of uncertain GTT results warrant greater attention in cancer care

Differences in cancer patients\u27 and clinicians\u27 preferences for disclosure of uncertain genomic tumor testing results.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinicians\u27 and patients\u27 preferences for disclosure of genomic tumor testing (GTT) results; to determine the sensitivity of these disclosure preferences to uncertainty about the actionability of results; and to explore factors associated with disclosure preferences. METHODS: Community-based oncology clinicians (n = 94) and patients (n = 1121) were surveyed about their preferences for disclosing GTT results with varying levels of uncertainty (Tiers 1, 2, 3). Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were used to compare clinicians\u27 and patients\u27 disclosure preferences and their sensitivity to uncertainty, and to explore associations between disclosure preferences and sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological factors. RESULTS: Relatively more patients than clinicians preferred disclosure, and their preferences were less sensitive to the uncertainty of GTT results. For patients and clinicians, lower uncertainty sensitivity was associated with positive GTT attitudes; for patients it was also associated with greater uncertainty tolerance and knowledge of uncertainty in GTT. CONCLUSION: Relatively more cancer patients than clinicians prefer disclosure of GTT results, and their preferences are less sensitive to result uncertainty. Uncertainty sensitivity in disclosure preferences is associated with GTT-related attitudes and uncertainty tolerance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Differences in cancer patients\u27 and clinicians\u27 preferences for disclosure of uncertain GTT results warrant greater attention in cancer care

Community oncologists’ perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing

Abstract Purpose Large-panel genomic tumor testing (GTT) is an emerging technology with great promise but uncertain clinical value. Previous research has documented variability in academic oncologists’ perceptions and use of GTT, but little is known about community oncologists’ perceptions of GTT and how perceptions relate to clinicians' intentions to use GTT. Methods Community oncology physicians (N = 58) participating in a statewide initiative aimed at improving access to large-panel GTT completed surveys assessing their confidence in using GTT, attitudes regarding the value of GTT, perceptions of barriers to GTT implementation, and future intentions to use GTTs. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to characterize these perceptions and to explore the relationships between them. Results There was substantial variability in clinicians’ perceptions of GTT. Clinicians generally had moderate confidence in their ability to use GTT, but lower confidence in patients’ ability to understand test results and access targeted treatment. Clinicians had positive attitudes regarding the value of GTT. Clinicians’ future intentions to use GTT were associated with greater confidence in using GTT and greater perceived barriers to implementing GTT, but not with attitudes about the value of GTT. Conclusions Community oncologists’ perceptions of large-panel genomic tumor testing are variable, and their future intentions to use GTT are associated with both their confidence in and perceived barriers to its use, but not with their attitudes towards GTT. More research is needed to understand other factors that determine how oncologists perceive and use GTT in clinical practice.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/173542/1/12885_2021_Article_8985.pd

The Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative: Implementing a Community Cancer Genomics Program Across an Entire Rural State.

PURPOSE: The Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative (MCGI) aimed to overcome patient- and provider-level barriers to using genomic tumor testing (GTT) in rural practices by providing genomic tumor boards (GTBs), clinician education, and access to comprehensive large-panel next-generation sequencing to all patients with cancer in Maine. This paper describes the successful implementation of the initiative and three key services made operative between 2016 and 2020. METHODS: A community-inclusive, hub-and-spoke approach was taken to implement the three program components: (1) a centralized GTB program; (2) a modular online education program, designed using an iterative approach with broad clinical stakeholders; and (3) GTT free of charge to clinicians and patients. Implementation timelines, participation metrics, and survey data were used to describe the rollout. RESULTS: The MCGI was launched over an 18-month period at all 19 oncology practices in the State. Seventy-nine physicians (66 medical oncologists, 5 gynecologic oncologists, 1 neuro-oncologist, and 7 pediatric oncologists) enrolled on the study, representing 100% of all practicing oncologists in Maine. Between July 2017 and September 2020, 1610 patients were enrolled. A total of 515 cases were discussed by 47 (73%) clinicians in 196 GTBs. Clinicians who participated in the GTBs enrolled significantly more patients on the study, stayed in Maine, and reported less time spent in clinical patient care. CONCLUSION: The MCGI was able to engage geographically and culturally disparate cancer care practices in a precision oncology program using a hub-and-spoke model. By facilitating access to GTT, structured education, and GTBs, we narrowed the gap in the implementation of precision oncology in one of the most rural states in the country