ArticleJCO precision oncology2020
Engaging Patients in Precision Oncology: Development and Usability of a Web-Based Patient-Facing Genomic Sequencing Report.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Insights into Colorectal Cancer through the Lens of Precision Oncology and Personalized Medicine: Multi-Omics Helps Aging of Predisposed People.Current aging science · 2025Review
- Sharing Genomic Tumor Sequencing Results With Patients: Experiences of Advanced Practice Oncology Providers.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2024Article
- 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
- A Framework for Promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Genetics and Genomics Research.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Characteristics and experiences of patients from a community-based and consumer-directed hereditary cancer population screening initiative.HGG advances · 2022Article
- From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Pediatric Oncologists' Experiences Returning and Incorporating Genomic Sequencing Results into Cancer Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- A Web Portal for Communicating Polygenic Risk Score Results for Health Care Use-The P5 Study.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- The Community Oncology and Academic Medical Center Alliance in the Age of Precision Medicine: Cancer Genetics and Genomics Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEvidence-based somatic and germline sequencing has transformed cancer care and improves patient outcomes. However, patients' low genetic literacy and misunderstanding of their own genomic results poses a threat to the realization of precision oncology. To optimize patient genomic comprehension, we developed a Web-based, patient-directed, genomic sequencing education and return-of-results tool, HOPE-Genomics.
methodsThe HOPE-Genomics prototype included somatic and germline sequencing results, embedded multimedia genomic education, and interactive features (eg, request for genetic counseling). Between January and April 2018, we elicited feedback on tool usability and comprehensiveness through participant surveys, 4 focus groups of patients with cancer and their family members, and 3 provider focus groups (comprising 8 patients, 5 family members, and 19 providers).
resultsWe identified themes in patient/family tool-related responses, including the desire to view a patient-friendly report, a desire to receive multiple types of genomic information (eg, prognostic and uncertain), high acceptability of report content, and interest in tool-enabled access to genetic counseling. Major themes from the clinician focus groups included believing the tool could help patients formulate questions and facilitate patients' communication of results to family members. However, there were diverse responses from all participants in terms of tool implementation (ie, timing and nature of report release). Some participants preferred report release before meeting with the provider, and others preferred it during the appointment. Additionally, some clinicians were concerned about providing prognostic and treatment information through the tool.
conclusionThere was high acceptability and interest from patients, family members, and providers in a patient-directed genomics report. Future work will determine whether direct-to-patient reporting of genomic results improves patient knowledge, care engagement, and compliance with genomically guided interventions.
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.