RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Telegenetics services can expand access to guideline-recommended cancer genetic testing. However, access is often not distributed equitably to all races and ethnicities. We evaluated the impact of an on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service in a diverse Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) oncology clinic on likelihood of germline testing (GT) completion. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of patients who were referred for cancer genetics services at the Philadelphia VAMC between October 1, 2020, and February 28, 2022. We evaluated the association between genetics service (on-site v telegenetics) and likelihood of GT completion in a subcohort of new consults, excluding patients with prior consults and those referred for known history of germline mutations. RESULTS: A total of 238 Veterans, including 108 (45%) seen on site, were identified for cancer genetics services during the study period, with the majority referred for a personal (65%) or family (26%) history of cancer. In the subcohort of new consults, 121 Veterans (54% self-identified race/ethnicity [SIRE]-Black), including 60 (50%) seen on site, were included in the analysis of germline genetic testing completion. In a univariate analysis, patients who were seen by the on-site genetics service had 3.2-fold higher likelihood of completing GT (relative risk, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.89 to 5.48) compared with the telegenetics service. In multivariable regression analysis, the on-site genetics service was associated with higher likelihood of GT completion, but this association was only statistically significant in SIRE-Black compared with SIRE-White Veterans (adjusted RR, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.53 to 14.96; P < .001; P-interaction of race × genetics service = .016). CONCLUSION: An on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service embedded in a VAMC Oncology practice was associated with higher likelihood of germline genetic testing completion than a telegenetics service among self-identified Black Veterans.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes and dementia are diseases of high health care burden worldwide, and studies have shown that diabetes is associated with an increased relative risk of dementia. We set out to examine whether type 2 diabetes-associated genetic variants were associated with dementia and whether they differed by race/ethnicity or clinical dementia diagnosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated associations of two type 2 diabetes genetic risk scores (GRS and GRS-nonAPOE: a score without rs429358, a variant associated with Alzheimer disease [AD]) with three classifications of clinical dementia diagnoses in the Million Veteran Program (MVP): all-cause dementia, vascular dementia (VaD), and AD. We conducted our analysis stratified by European (EUR), African (AFR), and Hispanic (HIS) races/ethnicities. RESULTS: In EUR, we found associations of the GRS with all-cause dementia (odds ratio [OR] 1.06, P = 1.60e-07) and clinically diagnosed VaD (OR 1.12, P = 5.2e-05) but not with clinically diagnosed AD (OR 1.02, P = 0.43). The GRS was not associated with any dementia outcome in AFR or HIS. When testing with GRS-nonAPOE, we found that effect size estimates in EUR increased and P values decreased for all-cause dementia (OR 1.08, P = 2.6e-12), for VaD (OR 1.14, P = 7.2e-07), and for AD (OR 1.06, P = 0.018). For AFR, the association of GRS-nonAPOE and clinically diagnosed VaD (OR 1.15, P = 0.016) was statistically significant. There were no significant findings for HIS. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence suggesting shared genetic pathogenesis of diabetes with all-cause dementia and clinically diagnosed VaD.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate health care systems for the availability of population-level data on the frequency of use and results of clinical molecular marker tests to inform precision cancer care. METHODS: We assessed cancer-related molecular marker test data availability across 12 US health care systems in the Cancer Research Network. Overall, these systems provide care to a diverse population of more than 12 million people in the United States. We performed qualitative analyses of test data availability for five blood-based protein, nine germline, and 14 tissue-based tumor marker tests in each health care system's electronic health record and tumor registry using key informants, test code lists, and manual review of data types and output. We then performed quantitative analyses to estimate the proportion of patients with cancer with test utilization data and results for specific molecular marker tests. RESULTS: Health systems were able to systematically capture population-level data on all five blood protein markers, six of 14 tissue-based tumor markers, and none of the nine germline markers. Successful, systematic data capture was achievable for tests with electronic data feeds for test results (blood protein markers) or through prior manual abstraction by tumor registrars (select tumor-based markers). For test results stored in scanned image files (particularly germline and tumor marker tests), information on which test was performed and test results was not readily accessible in an electronic format. CONCLUSION: Even in health care systems with sophisticated electronic health records, there were few codified data elements available for evaluating precision cancer medicine test use and results at the population level. Health care organizations should establish standards for electronic reporting of precision medicine tests to expedite cancer research and facilitate the implementation of precision medicine approaches.

Asunto(s)