ArticleJournal of oncology practice2017
Interest and Attitudes of Patients With Advanced Cancer With Regard to Secondary Germline Findings From Tumor Genomic Profiling.
Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of preferences for additional findings from genomic testing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Pooled it
- How people undergoing genomic sequencing interpret and react to varied secondary findings with limited actionability.Personalized medicine · 2025Article
- What Do Patients With Cancer Know, or Want to Know, About Genomic Tumor Sequencing and Genetic Testing? A State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2024Review
- Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024Article
- Development of a novel measure of advanced cancer patients' perceived utility of secondary germline findings from tumor genomic profiling.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Article
- Validation of the multidimensional impact of Cancer Risk Assessment Questionnaire to assess impact of waiting for genome sequencing results.Psycho-oncology · 2022Article
- Colorectal Cancer Survivors' Receptivity toward Genomic Testing and Targeted Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs to Prevent Cancer Recurrence.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- The Role of Medical Mistrust in Concerns about Tumor Genomic Profiling among Black and African American Cancer Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Community oncologists' perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- A qualitative study among patients with an inherited retinal disease on the meaning of genomic unsolicited findings.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Patients' and Oncologists' Knowledge and Expectations Regarding Tumor Multigene Next-Generation Sequencing: A Narrative Review.The oncologist · 2021Review
- Genomic Testing for Relapsed and Refractory Lymphoid Cancers: Understanding Patient Values.The patient · 2021Article
- Disclosure of secondary findings in exome sequencing of 2480 Japanese cancer patients.Human genetics · 2021Article
- Quality of life drives patients' preferences for secondary findings from genomic sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2020Article
- Cascading After Peridiagnostic Cancer Genetic Testing: An Alternative to Population-Based Screening.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020Article
- Engaging Patients in Precision Oncology: Development and Usability of a Web-Based Patient-Facing Genomic Sequencing Report.JCO precision oncology · 2020Article
- Article
- Implementation of Precision Cancer Medicine: Progress and the Path to Realizing the Promise of Tumor Sequencing.Journal of oncology practice · 2019Article
- Attitudes toward genomic tumor profiling tests in Japan: patients, family members, and the public.Journal of human genetics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTumor genomic profiling (TGP) can reveal secondary findings about inherited disease risks in a patient with cancer. Little is known about how patients with advanced cancer, currently the primary users of TGP, perceive the benefits and harms of secondary germline findings.
methodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with 40 patients with advanced breast, bladder, colorectal, or lung cancer who had TGP. Qualitative interview data were evaluated by using a thematic content analysis approach.
resultsMost participants expressed interest in the prospect of learning their secondary germline findings (57%), although a minority was equivocal (29%) or disinterested (14%). Reasons for these preferences varied but were influenced by participants' perceptions of diverse benefits and harms of this information, which they regarded as relevant to themselves; their families; and other patients with cancer, medical science, and society. These attitudes were uniquely shaped by participants' personal disease experiences and health status.
conclusionMany patients with advanced cancer are interested in learning secondary germline findings and hold optimistic and perhaps unrealistic beliefs about the potential health benefits. Patients also have important concerns about clinical and emotional implications of this information. These perceptions are necessary to address to ensure that patients make informed decisions about learning secondary germline findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.