ArticleBMC cancer2026
Experiences accessing and receiving tumour genetic profiling in Victoria: a consumer-led cross-sectional survey study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumour genetic profiling has the potential to significantly improve cancer care by informing targeted treatments and improving patient outcomes. As use increases worldwide, greater attention should be paid to consumer experiences, need and priorities. This study is consumer-led and aims to inform an equitable and ethical roll out of future services by exploring consumer: 1) awareness of tumour genetic profiling, 2) experiences with tumour genetic profiling, and 3) priorities for improving access to and delivery of tumour genetic profiling within Victoria, Australia.
methodsA consumer reference group was formed and supported by experienced researchers and professional staff of a comprehensive cancer centre alliance to develop and conduct the research study. A cross-sectional survey was conducted between January and May 2024, capturing demographic and disease characteristics, along with questions relating to each aim. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Eligible participants were patients diagnosed with cancer whose treatment teams were based in Victoria, Australia, or caregivers of such patients.
resultsOf the 181 respondents (n = 36 carers, n = 145 patients), 23% (n = 44) reported that they (or the person they cared for) had undergone tumour genetic profiling. The majority reported a positive impact, including increased knowledge/understanding (n = 30, 68%) and personalised treatment options (n = 23, 52%), with very low decisional regret (mean: 3/100). However, 14% reported no understanding of the results at all, and confusion was reported as a drawback of testing. Higher education and greater shared decision making were associated with better understanding of results (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively) and higher education was also associated with greater awareness of genetic tumour profiling (p = 0.008). The primary barriers to uptake were lack of awareness (n = 88, 83%) and lack of perceived benefit from the treatment team (n = 19, 18%). Key strategies for improvement identified by participants included government-subsidised testing and improved patient and clinician education.
conclusionsThis study highlighted gaps in consumer awareness and access to tumour genetic profiling, as well as the benefits of shared decision making. Overall, consumer-led insights emphasise the need for equitable funding, education, and systemic improvements. These findings can inform policies and practices aimed at delivering person-centred cancer care in Victoria and beyond. Future longitudinal research is needed to comprehensively explore these associations and track progress.
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.