Telephone-Based Counseling Effective for Women at Risk of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

Article

The use of telephone counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer was noninferior to in-person counseling with no significant adverse effects on long-term outcomes.

The use of telephone counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer was noninferior to in-person counseling with no significant adverse effects on long-term outcomes, according to the results of a study published August 20 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. However, the testing uptake was lower for patients who received telephone counseling.

VIDEO:

Anita Y. Kinney, PhD, RN, discusses telephone-based genetic counseling for women at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

“This study provides strong long-term evidence that telephone counseling for women at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer is not inferior to in-person counseling with regard to fostering informed decision making, minimizing adverse psychologic and quality-of-life outcomes, and promoting perceived personal control 1 year after counseling,” wrote Anita Y. Kinney, PhD, RN, of the University of New Mexico, and colleagues. “Alternative care delivery approaches, such as telephone communication, can make cancer genetic services more widely accessible without sacrificing safety.”

According to the study, it is recommended that women at risk for hereditary cancer get clinical genetic risk assessments from trained cancer genetic professionals, however, previous research has shown that as few as one-third of at-risk women receive genetic counseling.

For this study the researchers used population-based sampling to identify women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and randomly assigned them to in-person (n = 495) or telephone-based (n = 493) genetic counseling and testing. Both in-person counseling and telephone-based counseling included an educational brochure and visual aids. These women could decide to provide a sample at their appointment or bring a BRCA1/2 buccal test kit home. Women assigned to telephone counseling were mailed sealed packets containing the same printed materials. If the women decided to undergo testing they were mailed a testing kit.

At 1 year, the researchers found that telephone-based counseling was noninferior to in-person counseling for all of the psychosocial and informed decision-making outcomes: anxiety, cancer-specific distress, perceived personal control, and decisional conflict about their testing decision.

By 1 year, more women who had in-person counseling underwent testing than did women who received telephone counseling (27.9% vs 37.3%).

“A contributing factor to the lower overall uptake of testing in this study may be the active recruitment strategy, which identified eligible women from population-based sources without any direct involvement of or referral from their primary health care providers,” the researchers wrote. “In general, recommendation from a health care provider strengthen perceptions about the importance of genetic risk assessment.”

Testing among women in rural areas was higher for both telephone counseling (38.7% vs 25.9%) and in-person counseling (41.3% vs 36.6%) compared with testing in women in urban areas. According to the researchers, this suggested that “BRCA1/2 testing interests were satisfied by expanding access to genetic counseling through the two modalities.”

Recent Videos
Administering oral SERD-based regimens may enhance patients’ quality of life when undergoing treatment for ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.
Gedatolisib-based triplet regimens may be effective among patients with prior endocrine resistance or rapid progression following frontline therapy.
Oncologists are still working on management strategies for neuropathy; a common adverse effect related to chemotherapeutics for ovarian cancer.
Genetic testing information can be used to risk-stratify ovarian cancer survivors for breast cancer, particularly those with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.
Genetic testing for ovarian cancer may help inform treatment decisions for patients with advanced disease, particularly regarding PARP inhibitor use.
Leading experts in the breast cancer field highlight the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and other treatment modalities.
Related Content