Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41579216›Full record

ArticleFamilial cancer2026

Delphi panel consensus on genetic testing for prostate cancer in Australia: Whom to test and how?

Kim Edmunds, Shiksha Arora, Sri Teppala, Paul Scuffham, David Fairbairn, Matthew J Roberts, Lisa Horvath, David P Smith, Haitham Tuffaha

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Familial cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

9 authors.

Kim EdmundsCentre for the Business and Economics of Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. k.edmunds@uq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7379-1294
Shiksha AroraCentre for the Business and Economics of Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3098-4584
Sri TeppalaCentre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2818-840X
Paul ScuffhamCentre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5931-642X
David FairbairnPathology Queensland, The Royal Brisbane Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0009-0005-9186-3972
Matthew J RobertsUQ Centre for Clinical Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0552-7402
Lisa HorvathMedical Oncology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6842-9223
David P SmithThe University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, The Daffodil Centre, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1474-3214
Haitham TuffahaCentre for the Business and Economics of Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2993-3480

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to estimate the consensus of Australian Health Professionals and/or Researchers (HP/Rs) and Consumers (patients/family/carers) (Cs) on international genetic testing recommendations. Modified Delphi Panel study with seven domains of interest. Fifty-five statements were devised for an online survey administered in REDCap. HP/Rs and Cs were recruited from professional networks and associations for participation in the study. Statements were rated using a Likert scale and analysed using descriptive statistics. Free text comments were allowed within each domain and analysed using thematic analysis. Thirty-six HP/Rs and 27 Cs participated. There was consensus on testing men with a family history of a high-risk hereditary gene; men with PCa and a family history of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) syndrome or Lynch syndrome; and men with metastatic PCa. There was consensus on testing BRCA2, BRCA1 and DNA MMR genes for men with metastatic PCa. Thematic analysis of HP/R comments revealed three main topics: the lack of information to make a decision, insufficient knowledge of genetic testing, and capacity to provide genetic testing and counselling. This is the first Australian study on genetic testing recommendations in PCa to inform who should be tested and how. Our study showed apparent deficits in knowledge and implementation, exacerbated by workforce issues around the provision of genetic counselling and testing. Future work should focus on evaluating these recommendations for implementation in Australian practice.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingProstatic NeoplasmsAustraliaConsensusDelphi TechniqueGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMaleDelphi panel studyGenetic counsellingGenetic testingProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID41579216
PMCPMC12831670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.