Blazer Kathleen R, Nehoray Bita, Solomon Ilana, Niell-Swiller Mariana, Culver Julie O, Uman Gwen C, Weitzel Jeffrey N
1 City of Hope, Division of Clinical Cancer Genetics , Duarte, California.
2 Vital Research , Los Angeles, California.
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2015 Dec;19(12):657-65. doi: 10.1089/gtmb.2015.0061. Epub 2015 Nov 5.
Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are driving a shift from single-gene to multigene panel testing for clinical genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). This study explored perceptions, experiences, and challenges with NGS testing for GCRA among U.S. community-based clinicians.
Surveys delivered at initial and 8-month time points, and 12-month tracking of cases presented in a multidisciplinary web-based case conference series, were conducted with GCRA providers who participated in a 235-member nationwide community of practice.
The proportion of respondents ordering panel tests rose from 29% at initial survey (27/94) to 44% (46/107) within 8 months. Respondents reported significantly less confidence about interpreting and counseling about NGS compared with single-gene test results (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The most cited reasons for not ordering NGS tests included concerns about clinical utility, interpreting and communicating results, and lack of knowledge/skills. Multigene panels were used in 204/668 cases presented during 2013, yielding 37 (18%) deleterious (7% in low/moderate-penetrance genes), 88 (43%) with ≥1 variant of uncertain significance, 77 (38%) uninformative negative, and 2 (1%) inconclusive results.
Despite concerns about utility and ability to interpret/counsel about NGS results, a rapidly increasing uptake of NGS testing among community clinicians was documented. Challenges identified in case discussions point to the need for ongoing education, practice-based support, and opportunities to partner in research that contributes to characterization of lesser known genes.
新一代测序(NGS)技术的进步正在推动临床遗传性癌症风险评估(GCRA)从单基因检测向多基因检测转变。本研究探讨了美国社区临床医生对NGS用于GCRA检测的看法、经验和挑战。
对参与一个由235名成员组成的全国性实践社区的GCRA提供者进行了调查,在初始和8个月时间点进行了问卷调查,并对一个多学科的基于网络的病例会议系列中呈现的病例进行了12个月的跟踪。
在初始调查时,订购多基因检测的受访者比例为29%(27/94),8个月内升至44%(46/107)。与单基因检测结果相比,受访者对解读和咨询NGS结果的信心明显较低(所有比较的p值均<0.0001)。不订购NGS检测的最常见原因包括对临床效用、解读和传达结果以及缺乏知识/技能的担忧。2013年期间呈现的668例病例中,有204例使用了多基因检测板,结果显示37例(18%)有害(低/中度 penetrance基因中为7%),88例(43%)有≥1个意义不确定的变异,77例(38%)无信息阴性,2例(1%)结果不确定。
尽管对NGS检测的效用以及解读/咨询结果的能力存在担忧,但记录显示社区临床医生对NGS检测的采用率正在迅速上升。病例讨论中发现的挑战表明,需要持续教育、基于实践的支持以及参与有助于表征鲜为人知基因的研究的机会。