• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基层医疗诊所评估遗传性癌症风险的策略:一项整群随机临床试验。

Strategies to Assess Risk for Hereditary Cancer in Primary Care Clinics: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Swisher Elizabeth M, Harris Heather M, Knerr Sarah, Theoryn Tesla N, Norquist Barbara M, Brant Jeannine, Shirts Brian H, Beers Faith, Cameron DaLaina, Dusic Emerson J, Riemann Laurie A, Devine Beth, Raff Michael L, Kadel Rabindra, Cabral Howard J, Wang Catharine

机构信息

Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle.

Department of Bioethics and Humanities, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Mar 3;8(3):e250185. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0185.

DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0185
PMID:40053353
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11889468/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Best practices for improving access to assessment of hereditary cancer risk in primary care are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 population-based engagement strategies for identifying primary care patients with a family or personal history of cancer and offering eligible individuals genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The EDGE (Early Detection of Genetic Risk) clinical trial cluster-randomized 12 clinics from 2 health care systems in Montana, Wyoming, and Washington state to 1 of 2 engagement approaches for assessment of hereditary cancer risk in primary care. The study population included 95 623 English-speaking patients at least 25 years old with a primary care visit during the recruitment window between April 1, 2021, and March 31, 2022.

INTERVENTION

The intervention comprised 2 risk assessment engagement approaches: (1) point of care (POC), conducted by staff immediately preceding clinical appointments, and (2) direct patient engagement (DPE), where letter and email outreach facilitated at-home completion. Patients who completed risk assessment and met prespecified criteria were offered genetic testing via a home-delivered saliva testing kit at no cost.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with a visit who (1) completed the risk assessment and (2) completed genetic testing. Logistic regression models were used to compare the POC and DPE approaches, allowing for overdispersion and including clinic as a design factor. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to evaluate primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Over a 12-month window, 95 623 patients had a primary care visit across the 12 clinics. Those who completed the risk assessment (n = 13 705) were predominately female (64.7%) and aged between 65 and 84 years (39.6%). The POC approach resulted in a higher proportion of patients completing risk assessment than the DPE approach (19.1% vs 8.7%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.68; 95% CI, 1.72-4.17; P < .001) but a similar proportion completing testing (1.5% vs 1.6%; AOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.64-1.46; P = .86). Among those eligible for testing, POC test completion was approximately half of that for the DPE approach (24.7% vs 44.7%; AOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.64; P < .001). The proportion of tested patients identified with an actionable pathogenic variant was significantly lower for the POC approach than the DPE approach (3.8% vs 6.6%; AOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cluster randomized clinical trial of risk assessment delivery, POC engagement resulted in a higher rate of assessment of hereditary cancer risk than the DPE approach but a similar rate of genetic testing completion. Using a combination of engagement strategies may be the optimal approach for greater reach and impact.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746794.

摘要

重要性

在初级保健中,改善遗传性癌症风险评估可及性的最佳实践尚不存在。

目的

比较两种基于人群的参与策略,以识别有癌症家族史或个人史的初级保健患者,并为符合条件的个体提供癌症易感性基因检测。

设计、地点和参与者:EDGE(遗传风险早期检测)临床试验将蒙大拿州、怀俄明州和华盛顿州2个医疗系统的12家诊所进行整群随机分组,分为2种参与方法中的1种,用于初级保健中遗传性癌症风险的评估。研究人群包括在2021年4月1日至2022年3月31日招募期间至少25岁且有初级保健就诊的95623名说英语的患者。

干预措施

干预包括2种风险评估参与方法:(1)即时护理(POC),由工作人员在临床预约前立即进行;(2)直接患者参与(DPE),通过信件和电子邮件宣传促进在家完成。完成风险评估并符合预先设定标准的患者可通过免费的家庭唾液检测试剂盒获得基因检测。

主要结局和测量指标

主要结局是就诊患者中(1)完成风险评估和(2)完成基因检测的比例。使用逻辑回归模型比较POC和DPE方法,考虑过度离散,并将诊所作为设计因素纳入。采用意向性分析来评估主要结局。

结果

在12个月的时间段内,12家诊所共有95623名患者进行了初级保健就诊。完成风险评估的患者(n = 13705)主要为女性(64.7%),年龄在65至84岁之间(39.6%)。POC方法导致完成风险评估的患者比例高于DPE方法(19.1%对8.7%;调整优势比[AOR],2.68;95%置信区间,1.72 - 4.17;P <.001),但完成检测的比例相似(1.5%对1.6%;AOR,0.96;95%置信区间,0.64 - 1.46;P =.86)。在符合检测条件的患者中,POC检测完成率约为DPE方法的一半(24.7%对44.7%;AOR,0.49;95%置信区间,0.37 - 0.64;P <.001)。POC方法识别出可采取行动的致病变异的检测患者比例显著低于DPE方法(3.8%对6.6%;AOR,0.61;95%置信区间,0.44 - 0.85;P =.003)。

结论和相关性

在这项风险评估实施的整群随机临床试验中,POC参与导致遗传性癌症风险评估率高于DPE方法,但基因检测完成率相似。结合使用多种参与策略可能是实现更大覆盖范围和影响的最佳方法。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT04746794。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c4af/11889468/75468469946a/jamanetwopen-e250185-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c4af/11889468/75468469946a/jamanetwopen-e250185-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c4af/11889468/75468469946a/jamanetwopen-e250185-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Strategies to Assess Risk for Hereditary Cancer in Primary Care Clinics: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.基层医疗诊所评估遗传性癌症风险的策略:一项整群随机临床试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Mar 3;8(3):e250185. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0185.
2
Strategies of testing for syphilis during pregnancy.孕期梅毒检测策略。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 29;2014(10):CD010385. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010385.pub2.
3
Nutritional interventions for survivors of childhood cancer.儿童癌症幸存者的营养干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 22;2016(8):CD009678. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009678.pub2.
4
Intravenous magnesium sulphate and sotalol for prevention of atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass surgery: a systematic review and economic evaluation.静脉注射硫酸镁和索他洛尔预防冠状动脉搭桥术后房颤:系统评价与经济学评估
Health Technol Assess. 2008 Jun;12(28):iii-iv, ix-95. doi: 10.3310/hta12280.
5
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.
6
Adefovir dipivoxil and pegylated interferon alfa-2a for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and economic evaluation.阿德福韦酯与聚乙二醇化干扰素α-2a治疗慢性乙型肝炎:系统评价与经济学评估
Health Technol Assess. 2006 Aug;10(28):iii-iv, xi-xiv, 1-183. doi: 10.3310/hta10280.
7
Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.在基层医疗机构或医院门诊环境中,如果患者出现以下症状和体征,可判断其是否患有 COVID-19。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 20;5(5):CD013665. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub3.
8
Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.两种现代生存预测工具 SORG-MLA 和 METSSS 在接受手术联合放疗和单纯放疗治疗有症状长骨转移患者中的比较。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Dec 1;482(12):2193-2208. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003185. Epub 2024 Jul 23.
9
Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.用于 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的快速、即时抗原检测。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 22;7(7):CD013705. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013705.pub3.
10
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训

引用本文的文献

1
Population health management of human phenotype ontology.人类表型本体的人群健康管理。
Front Artif Intell. 2025 Aug 13;8:1496935. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1496935. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
MRI Surveillance and Breast Cancer Mortality in Women With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Sequence Variations.携带 BRCA1 和 BRCA2 序列变异的女性的 MRI 监测与乳腺癌死亡率。
JAMA Oncol. 2024 Apr 1;10(4):493-499. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.6944.
2
The frequency of pathogenic variation in the All of Us cohort reveals ancestry-driven disparities.“我们所有人”队列中致病变异的频率揭示了祖先驱动的差异。
Commun Biol. 2024 Feb 19;7(1):174. doi: 10.1038/s42003-023-05708-y.
3
Attitudes towards genetic testing: The role of genetic literacy, motivated cognition, and socio-demographic characteristics.
对基因检测的态度:遗传素养、动机认知和社会人口特征的作用。
PLoS One. 2023 Nov 15;18(11):e0293187. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293187. eCollection 2023.
4
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2024.美国国立综合癌症网络(NCCN)指南见解:遗传/家族性高风险评估:乳腺癌、卵巢癌和胰腺癌,2024年第2版
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023 Oct;21(10):1000-1010. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0051.
5
Remotely Delivered Cancer Genetic Testing in the Making Genetic Testing Accessible (MAGENTA) Trial: A Randomized Clinical Trial.远程提供癌症基因检测以实现基因检测的可及性(MAGENTA)试验:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Oncol. 2023 Nov 1;9(11):1547-1555. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.3748.
6
Designing Effective and Appropriate Opt-Out Approaches for Patient Outreach.设计有效的、合适的患者外展退出策略。
JAMA Intern Med. 2023 Nov 1;183(11):1194-1195. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.4628.
7
Correlates of COVID-19 vaccine coverage in Arkansas: Results from a weighted random sample survey.阿肯色州 COVID-19 疫苗接种率的相关因素:一项加权随机抽样调查结果。
Vaccine. 2023 Sep 22;41(41):6120-6126. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.08.075. Epub 2023 Sep 1.
8
Implementing digital systems to facilitate genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: An observational study of 4 clinical workflows.实施数字系统以促进遗传性癌症综合征的基因检测:对 4 种临床工作流程的观察性研究。
Genet Med. 2023 May;25(5):100802. doi: 10.1016/j.gim.2023.100802. Epub 2023 Feb 11.
9
Impact of a physician recommendation on COVID-19 vaccination intent among vaccine hesitant individuals.医生推荐对疫苗犹豫者 COVID-19 疫苗接种意愿的影响。
Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Jan;106:107-112. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.09.013. Epub 2022 Sep 30.
10
Unraveling implementation context: the Basel Approach for coNtextual ANAlysis (BANANA) in implementation science and its application in the SMILe project.解析实施背景:实施科学中的巴塞尔情境分析方法(BANANA)及其在SMILe项目中的应用。
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Oct 1;3(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s43058-022-00354-7.