Quality of Clinician-Reported Cancer History When Ordering Genetic Testing

被引:21
|
作者
LaDuca, Holly [1 ]
McFarland, Rachel [2 ]
Gutierrez, Stephanie [1 ]
Yussuf, Amal [1 ]
Ho, Nadia [1 ]
Pepper, Jonathan [1 ]
Reineke, Patrick [1 ]
Cain, Taylor [3 ]
Blanco, Kirsten [1 ]
Horton, Carolyn [1 ]
Dolinsky, Jill S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ambry Genet, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 USA
[2] Univ Calif Irvine, Irvine, CA USA
[3] Sarah Lawrence Coll, Bronxville, NY 10708 USA
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1200/CCI.18.00014
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose Clinical history data reported on test requisition forms (TRFs) for hereditary cancer multigene panel testing (MGPT) are routinely used by genetic testing laboratories. More recently, publications have incorporated TRF-based clinical data into studies exploring yield of testing by phenotype and estimating cancer risks for mutation carriers. We aimed to assess the quality of TRF data for patients undergoing MGPT. Patients and Methods Ten percent of patients who underwent hereditary cancer MGPT between January and June 2015 at a clinical laboratory were randomly selected. TRF-reported cancer diagnoses were evaluated for completeness and accuracy for probands and relatives using clinical documents such as pedigrees and chart notes as the comparison standard in cases where these documents were submitted after the time of test order. Results TRF-reported cancer sites and ages at diagnosis were complete for > 90.0% of proband cancer diagnoses overall, and the completion rate was even higher (> 96.0%) for breast, ovarian, colorectal, and uterine cancers. When reported, these data were accurate on TRFs for > 99.5% of proband cancer sites and > 97.5% of proband ages at diagnosis. Cancer site and age at diagnosis data were also complete on the TRF for the majority of cancers among first- and second-degree relatives. Completeness decreased as relation to the proband became more distant, whereas accuracy remained high across all degrees of relation. Conclusion Data collected as part of cancer genetic risk assessment is completely and accurately reported on TRFs for the majority of probands and their close relatives and is comparable to information directly obtained from clinic notes, particularly for breast and other cancers commonly associated with hereditary cancer syndromes. (C) 2018 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 11
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Clinician-Reported Management Recommendations in Response to Universal Germline Genetic Testing in Patients With Prostate Cancer
    Shore, Neal
    Pieczonka, Christopher
    Heron, Sean
    Gazi, Mukaram
    Cahn, David
    Belkoff, Laurence H.
    Berger, Aaron
    Mazzarella, Brian
    Veys, Joseph
    Idom, Charles
    Morris, David
    Jayram, Gautam
    Engelman, Alexander
    Dato, Paul
    Bevan-Thomas, Richard
    Wise, David R.
    Hardwick, Mary Kay
    Rojahn, Susan
    Layman, Paige
    Heald, Brandie
    Ellsworth, Rachel E.
    Hatchell, Kathryn E.
    Nussbaum, Robert L.
    Nielsen, Sarah M.
    Esplin, Edward D.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 212 (06): : 832 - 843
  • [2] Letter: Clinician-Reported Management Recommendations in Response to Universal Germline Genetic Testing in Patients With Prostate Cancer
    Sun, Ruolin
    Shan, Dan
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 212 (06): : 916 - 917
  • [3] Commentary on the development of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE)
    Rubanovich, Caryn Kseniya
    Smith, Hadley Stevens
    Bloss, Cinnamon S.
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2020, 22 (03) : 665 - 666
  • [4] Quality appraise of Clinician-Reported Outcome questionnaires in China
    Wang, Jue-lian
    Hou, Zheng-kun
    Liu, Feng-bin
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (01) : 139 - 140
  • [5] Clinician-Reported Impact of Germline Multigene Panel Testing on Cancer Risk Management Recommendations
    Horton, Carolyn
    Blanco, Kirsten
    Lo, Min-Tzu
    Speare, Virginia
    LaDuca, Holly
    Dolinsky, Jill S.
    Kurian, Allison W.
    JNCI CANCER SPECTRUM, 2022, 6 (02)
  • [6] Applying the clinician-reported genetic testing utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) to genome sequencing
    Hurst, Anna
    Luca, Stephanie
    Cochran, Meagan
    Chad, Lauren
    Meyn, Stephen
    Pullenayegum, Eleanor
    Ungar, Wendy
    Bick, David
    Hayeems, Robin
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 24 (03) : S269 - S270
  • [7] Commentary on the development of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) Response
    Hayeems, R. Z.
    Luca, S.
    Ungar, W. J.
    Bhatt, A.
    Chad, L.
    Pullenayegum, E.
    Meyn, M. S.
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2020, 22 (03) : 667 - 668
  • [8] The Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE): Preliminary evidence of validity and reliability
    Hayeems, Robin Z.
    Luca, Stephanie
    Ungar, Wendy J.
    Venkataramanan, Viji
    Tsiplova, Kate
    Bashir, Naazish S.
    Costain, Gregory
    Inglese, Cara
    McNiven, Vanda
    Quercia, Nada
    Shugar, Andrea
    Yoon, Grace
    Cytrynbaum, Cheryl
    Dupuis, Lucie
    Shao, Zhuo
    Hewson, Stacy
    Shuman, Cheryl
    Aul, Ritu
    Liston, Eriskay
    Babul-Hirji, Riyana
    Bushby, Alexandra
    Pullenayegum, Eleanor
    Chad, Lauren
    Meyn, M. Stephen
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2022, 24 (02) : 430 - 438
  • [9] The development of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE): a novel strategy for measuring the clinical utility of genetic testing
    Hayeems, R. Z.
    Luca, S.
    Ungar, W. J.
    Bhatt, A.
    Chad, L.
    Pullenayegum, E.
    Meyn, M. S.
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2020, 22 (01) : 95 - 101
  • [10] Applying the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) to genome sequencing: further evidence of validity
    Robin Z. Hayeems
    Stephanie Luca
    Anna C. E. Hurst
    Meagan Cochran
    Chelsea Owens
    Alomgir Hossain
    Lauren Chad
    M. Stephen Meyn
    Eleanor Pullenayegum
    Wendy J. Ungar
    David Bick
    European Journal of Human Genetics, 2022, 30 : 1423 - 1431