Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38081141›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN2023

Pilot Trial of Streamlined Genetic Education and Traceback Genetic Testing in Prostate Cancer Survivors.

Marc D Schwartz, Beth N Peshkin, Claudine Isaacs, Christopher Grisham, Nora J Holmes, Lia J Sorgen, Sean Collins, Nancy Dawson, Colleen McGuire, Tobechukwu Okobi and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marc D SchwartzGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Beth N PeshkinGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Claudine IsaacsGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Christopher GrishamGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Nora J HolmesGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Lia J SorgenGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Sean CollinsGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Nancy DawsonGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Colleen McGuireGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Tobechukwu OkobiUniversity of the District of Columbia, Washington, DC.
Kelsey NewellGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Kavitha A KollaGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Veronique WeinsteinGeorgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Georgetown University · USUniversity of the District of Columbia · US

Funding

Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHEN W BYERS · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGermline genetic testing is recommended for men with metastatic or high-risk prostate cancer to inform treatment and risk management for other cancers and inform genetic testing in at-risk relatives. However, relatively few patients with prostate cancer undergo genetic testing. Given the low rate of testing and increasing demands on genetic service providers, strategies are needed that reduce barriers to testing while conserving genetic counseling resources. The primary goal of this study was to determine whether a proactive and streamlined "traceback" approach could yield increased genetic testing participation among prostate cancer survivors.

methodsWe randomized 107 survivors of metastatic and high-risk prostate cancer to streamlined testing (ST) versus enhanced usual care (EUC). ST participants were proactively provided with print genetic education materials and the option to proceed to genetic testing without pre-test genetic counseling. EUC participants were sent a letter from their physician advising them of their eligibility for genetic testing and recommending they schedule genetic counseling. The primary outcome was genetic testing participation. Secondary outcomes were distress, knowledge, decision satisfaction, and regret.

resultsIn the ST group, 41.5% of participants completed genetic testing compared with 27.8% in the EUC group. After adjusting for education and marital status, the odds of testing were more than twice as high for the ST group as for the EUC group (odds ratio, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.05-6.29). The groups did not differ on any of the psychosocial outcomes at the 3-month follow-up.

conclusionsProactive outreach paired with streamlined genetic testing delivery may be a safe, effective, and resource-efficient approach to facilitate traceback genetic testing in prostate cancer survivors.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsProstatic NeoplasmsGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHumansMaleMutationPilot ProjectsProstateBRCA1/BRCA2genetic counselinggenetic testingProstate Cancer SurvivorsTraceback

Identifiers

PMID38081141
PMCPMC12085863
OpenAlexW4389538247

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.