Coordination of Genetic Care: More Important and Complicated Than it Seems

Restricted access

Families with hereditary risk for developing malignancy benefit from organized, coordinated care by a genetics professional. This report presents a case illustrating the potential errors that can occur when genetic care is fragmented and not coordinated, including ordering too much or not enough genetic testing, failing to communicate with the family who is at potential genetic risk, failing to communicate what the results of testing mean, and failing to recommend appropriate care, which may lead to psychosocial distress and late-detected cancers. This case highlights the complexities of genetic care and why management by a genetics professional results in more fiscally responsible care, appropriate genetic testing, and comprehensive care for all family members at risk.

Submitted June 23, 2019; accepted for publication August 5, 2019.Disclosures: The author has not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation, analysis, results, or discussion of this article.Correspondence: Suzanne M. Mahon, DNSc, RN, AOCN, AGN-BC, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Saint Louis University, 3rd Floor West Pavilion, 3655 Vista Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63110. Email: suzanne.mahon@health.slu.edu
  • 1.

    Bensend TA, Veach PM, Niendorf KB. What’s the harm? Genetic counselor perceptions of adverse effects of genetics service provision by non-genetics professionals. J Genet Couns 2014;23:48–63.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Baldwin LM, Trivers KF, Andrilla CH, . Accuracy of ovarian and colon cancer risk assessments by U.S. physicians. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29:741–749.

  • 3.

    Wood ME, Kadlubek P, Pham TH, . Quality of cancer family history and referral for genetic counseling and testing among oncology practices: a pilot test of quality measures as part of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:824–829.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Mahon SM. The three-generation pedigree: a critical tool in cancer genetics care. Oncol Nurs Forum 2016;43:655–660.

  • 5.

    Foote JR, Lopez-Acevedo M, Buchanan AH, . Cost comparison of genetic testing strategies in women with epithelial ovarian cancer. J Oncol Pract 2017;13:e120–e129.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Hampel H. Genetic counseling and cascade genetic testing in Lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer 2016;15:423–427.

  • 7.

    Jacobs C, Dancyger C, Smith JA, Michie S. Accuracy of recall of information about a cancer-predisposing BRCA1/2 gene mutation among patients and relatives. Eur J Hum Genet 2015;23:147–151.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Miller CE, Krautscheid P, Baldwin EE, . Genetic counselor review of genetic test orders in a reference laboratory reduces unnecessary testing. Am J Med Genet A 2014;164A:1094–1101.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Haidle JL, Sternen DL, Dickerson JA, . Genetic counselors save costs across the genetic testing spectrum. Am J Manag Care 2017;23:SP428–430.

  • 10.

    Cragun D, Camperlengo L, Robinson E, . Differences in BRCA counseling and testing practices based on ordering provider type. Genet Med 2015;17:51–57.

  • 11.

    Ramos E, Haidle JL. Genetic testing: multiple problems to solve. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:518–519.

  • 12.

    Daly M, Pilarski R, Berry MP, . NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian. Version 3.2019. Accessed June 23, 2019. To view the most recent version, visit NCCN.org.

  • 13.

    King E, Mahon SM. Genetic testing: challenges and changes in testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2017;21:589–598.

  • 14.

    Childers CP, Childers KK, Maggard-Gibbons M, Macinko J. National estimates of genetic testing in women with a history of breast or ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:3800–3806.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Delikurt T, Williamson GR, Anastasiadou V, Skirton H. A systematic review of factors that act as barriers to patient referral to genetic services. Eur J Hum Genet 2015;23:739–745.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Burton-Chase AM, Hovick SR, Peterson SK, . Changes in screening behaviors and attitudes toward screening from pre-test genetic counseling to post-disclosure in Lynch syndrome families. Clin Genet 2013;83:215–220.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Buchanan AH, Rahm AK, Williams JL. Alternate service delivery models in cancer genetic counseling: a mini-review. Front Oncol 2016;6:120.

  • 18.

    Fabian CJ, Meyskens FL Jr, Bajorin DF, . Barriers to a career focus in cancer prevention: a report and initial recommendations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Prevention Workforce Pipeline Work Group. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:186–193.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Stoll K, Kubendran S, Cohen SA. The past, present and future of service delivery in genetic counseling: keeping up in the era of precision medicine. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2018;178:24–37.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Vadaparampil ST, Scherr CL, Cragun D, . Pre-test genetic counseling services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer delivered by non-genetics professionals in the state of Florida. Clin Genet 2015;87:473–477.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 639 639 584
PDF Downloads 148 148 128
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0