Adopting Consensus Terms for Testing in Precision Medicine

Author:

Martin Nikki A.1ORCID,Tepper Joel E.2ORCID,Giri Veda N.3ORCID,Stinchcombe Thomas E.4,Cheng Heather H.567ORCID,Javle Milind M.8ORCID,Konnick Eric Q.79ORCID

Affiliation:

1. LUNGevity Foundation, Bethesda, MD

2. Department of Radiation Oncology, UNC/Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC

3. Cancer Risk Assessment and Clinical Cancer Genetics, Departments of Medical Oncology, Cancer Biology, and Urology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA

4. Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

5. Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA

6. Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

7. Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA

8. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

9. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Abstract

PURPOSE Despite the well-understood benefits of biomarker and genetic testing in precision medicine, uptake remains low, particularly for patients with low socioeconomic status and minority ethnic backgrounds. Patients report having limited familiarity with testing terminology and may not be able to accurately explain testing's role in treatment decisions. Patient confusion and lack of understanding is exacerbated by a multiplicity of overlapping terms used in communicating about testing. A LUNGevity Foundation–led working group composed of five professional societies, 23 patient advocacy groups, and 19 industry members assessed and recommended specific terms for communicating with patients on testing for tumor characteristics and germline mutations. METHODS Members completed a precision oncology testing framework analysis (biomarkers, germline variants, testing modalities, biospecimen, and commonly used testing terms) for nine solid tumors and blood cancers. The evaluation was segmented into terms that distinguish between somatic and germline testing. Additional data were captured in a comprehensive survey (1,650 respondents) led by FORCE (Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered) on patient preferences on germline testing terms. RESULTS Thirty-three terms were noted in patient education related to biomarker, genetic, and genomic testing. Biomarker testing was selected as the preferred term for testing for somatic (acquired) alterations and other biomarkers. Genetic testing for an inherited mutation and genetic testing for inherited cancer risk were selected as the preferred terms for testing for germline variants. CONCLUSION Democratizing comprehension about precision oncology testing through intentional use of plain language and common umbrella terminology by oncology health care providers and others in the oncology ecosystem may help improve understanding and communication, and facilitate shared decision making about the role of appropriate testing in treatment decisions and other aspects of oncology care.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3