No abstract

Background - Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is the most common cardiovascular genetic disorder and, if left untreated, is associated with increased risk of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. Although FH is common, fatal, and treatable, it is underdiagnosed and undertreated due to a lack of systematic methods to identify individuals with FH and limited uptake of cascade testing. Methods and Results - This mixed-method, multi-stage study will optimize, test, and implement innovative approaches for both FH identification and cascade testing in three aims. To improve identification of individuals with FH, in Aim 1 we will compare and refine automated phenotype-based and genomic approaches to identify individuals likely to have FH. To improve cascade testing uptake for at-risk individuals, in Aim 2 we will use a patient-centered design thinking process to optimize and develop novel, active family communication methods. Using a prospective, observational pragmatic trial we will assess uptake and effectiveness of each family communication method on cascade testing. Guided by an implementation science framework, in Aim 3 we will develop a comprehensive guide to identify individuals with FH. Using the Conceptual Model for Implementation Research, we will evaluate implementation outcomes including feasibility, acceptability, and perceived sustainability as well as health outcomes related to the optimized methods and tools developed in Aims 1 and 2. Conclusions - Data generated from this study will address barriers and gaps in care related to underdiagnosis of FH by developing and optimizing tools to improve FH identification and cascade testing.

Men with a germline pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variant have increased risks for developing breast, pancreatic, prostate, and melanoma cancers, but little is known about how they understand and manage their cancer risks. This study examines how men with BRCA-related cancer risks manage uncertainty and information about their risks. Twenty-five men who were either a BRCA carrier or have a BRCA-positive first-degree family member that put the participant at 50% chance of also being a BRCA carrier were interviewed for this study. Using uncertainty management theory as a theoretical framework, this study demonstrates that men manage uncertainty by seeking information from female family members, websites, and healthcare providers, and are under-informed about their cancer risks. Further, in handling their information, men prefer information about cancer risk percentages and screening recommendations in the form of lists presented to them via websites, printed literature, proactive healthcare providers, and an identifiable male spokesperson. Finally, men used BRCA-related cancer risk information to make decisions about whether or not to engage in screening and prevention, manage their BRCA-related cancer risks, and overall family well-being-yet often at the expense of their own individual risks. Implications for genetic counseling and family conversations are discussed.

Successful proband‐mediated family communication and subsequent cascade genetic testing uptake requires interventions that present information clearly, in sufficient detail, and with medical authority. To facilitate family communication for patients receiving clinically actionable results via the MyCode® Community Health Initiative, a Family Sharing Tool (FST) and a cascade chatbot were developed. FST is an electronic mechanism allowing patients to share genetic test results with relatives via chatbot. The cascade chatbot describes the proband's result, associated disease risks, and recommended management and captures whether the user is a blood relative or caregiver, sex, and relationship to the proband. FST and cascade chatbot uptake among MyCode® probands and relatives was tracked from August 2018 through February 2020. Cascade genetic testing uptake was collected from testing laboratories as number of cascades per proband. Fifty‐eight percent (316/543) of probands consented to FST; 42% (227/543) declined. Receipt preferences were patient electronic health record (EHR) portal (52%), email (29%), and text (19%). Patient EHR portal users (p < 0.001) and younger patients were more likely to consent (p < 0.001). FST was deployed to 308 probands. Fifty‐nine percent (183/308) opened; of those, 56% (102/183) used FST to send a cascade chatbot to relatives. These 102 probands shared a cascade chatbot with 377 relatives. Sixty‐two percent (235/377) of relatives opened; of these, 69% (161/235) started, and of these, 57% (92/161) completed the cascade chatbot. Cascade genetic testing uptake was significantly greater among relatives of probands who consented to the FST (M = 2.34 cascades, SD = 2.10) than relatives of probands who declined (M = 1.40 cascades, SD = 0.82, p < 0.001). Proband age was not a significant predictor of cascade genetic testing uptake. Further work is needed to better understand factors impacting proband use of FST and relative use of cascade chatbots.

No abstract