Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25297947›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2015

Development of a tiered and binned genetic counseling model for informed consent in the era of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility.

Angela R Bradbury, Linda Patrick-Miller, Jessica Long, Jacquelyn Powers, Jill Stopfer, Andrea Forman, Christina Rybak, Kristin Mattie, Amanda Brandt, Rachelle Chambers and 21 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Uptake of Genetic Research Results and Patient-Reported Outcomes With Return of Results Incorporating Web-Based Predisclosure Education.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors.

Angela R Bradbury1] Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA [2] Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA [3] Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Linda Patrick-Miller1] Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA [2] Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Jessica LongDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Jacquelyn PowersDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Jill StopferDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Andrea FormanDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000000347828908
Christina RybakDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kristin MattieDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Camden, New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000000163893158
Amanda BrandtDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Rachelle ChambersDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000000194447169
Wendy K Chung1] Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA [2] Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000000334506926
Jane ChurpekDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Mary B DalyDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Laura DigiovanniDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Dana Farengo-ClarkDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Camden, New Jersey, USA.
Dominique FetzerDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Pamela GanschowDepartment of Internal Medicine, John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000000250384132
Generosa GranaDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Camden, New Jersey, USA.
Cassandra GuldenDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Michael HallDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Lynne KohlerDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kara MaxwellDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Shana MerrillDepartment of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Susan MontgomeryDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Rebecca MuellerDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Sarah NielsenDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Olufunmilayo Olopade1] Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA [2] Center for Clinical Cancer Genetics and Global Health, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Kimberly RaineyDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Christina SeelausDepartment of Internal Medicine, John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Katherine L Nathanson1] Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA [2] Department of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000000303827890
Susan M Domchek1] Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA [2] Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

Returning genetic research panel results for breast cancer susceptibilityR01CA190871 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BRADBURY, ANGELA R. · 2014 to 2025
$6.7M
Communicating Genetic Test Results by Telephone: A Randomized TrialR01CA160847 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BRADBURY, ANGELA R. · 2012 to 2015
$2.5M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA160847NCI NIH HHS R01 CA190871
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMultiplex genetic testing, including both moderate- and high-penetrance genes for cancer susceptibility, is associated with greater uncertainty than traditional testing, presenting challenges to informed consent and genetic counseling. We sought to develop a new model for informed consent and genetic counseling for four ongoing studies.

methodsDrawing from professional guidelines, literature, conceptual frameworks, and clinical experience, a multidisciplinary group developed a tiered-binned genetic counseling approach proposed to facilitate informed consent and improve outcomes of cancer susceptibility multiplex testing.

resultsIn this model, tier 1 "indispensable" information is presented to all patients. More specific tier 2 information is provided to support variable informational needs among diverse patient populations. Clinically relevant information is "binned" into groups to minimize information overload, support informed decision making, and facilitate adaptive responses to testing. Seven essential elements of informed consent are provided to address the unique limitations, risks, and uncertainties of multiplex testing.

conclusionA tiered-binned model for informed consent and genetic counseling has the potential to address the challenges of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility and to support informed decision making and adaptive responses to testing. Future prospective studies including patient-reported outcomes are needed to inform how to best incorporate multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility into clinical practice.Genet Med 17 6, 485-492.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseInformed ConsentModels, TheoreticalGenetic TestingHumansNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID25297947
PMCPMC4983405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.