Cargando…

Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician

BACKGROUND: Clinical whole exome sequencing was introduced in an Australian centre in 2017, as an alternative to Sanger sequencing. We aimed to identify predictors of cancer physicians’ somatic mutation test ordering behaviour. METHODS: A validated instrument assessed somatic mutation test ordering,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Demeshko, Anastassia, Pennisi, David J., Narayan, Sushil, Gray, Stacy W., Brown, Matthew A., McInerney-Leo, Aideen M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7663861/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33183308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02610-7
_version_ 1783609725116481536
author Demeshko, Anastassia
Pennisi, David J.
Narayan, Sushil
Gray, Stacy W.
Brown, Matthew A.
McInerney-Leo, Aideen M.
author_facet Demeshko, Anastassia
Pennisi, David J.
Narayan, Sushil
Gray, Stacy W.
Brown, Matthew A.
McInerney-Leo, Aideen M.
author_sort Demeshko, Anastassia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical whole exome sequencing was introduced in an Australian centre in 2017, as an alternative to Sanger sequencing. We aimed to identify predictors of cancer physicians’ somatic mutation test ordering behaviour. METHODS: A validated instrument assessed somatic mutation test ordering, genomic confidence, perceived utility of tumour molecular profiling, and percent of patients eligible for targeted therapy. A cash incentive was included in 189/244 questionnaires which were mailed to all Queensland cancer specialists in November 2018. RESULTS: 110 participated (response rate 45%); 54.7% oncologists, and the remainder were surgeons, haematologists and pulmonologists. Oncologists were more likely to respond (p = 0.008), and cash incentive improved the response rate (p < 0.001). 67/102 (65.7%) of physicians ordered ≥ 5 somatic mutation tests annually. Oncologists saw 86.75 unique patients monthly and ordered 2.33 somatic mutation tests (2.2%). An average of 51/110 (46.1%) reported having little/no genomic confidence. Logistic regression identified two significant predictors of somatic mutation test ordering: being an oncologist (OR 3.557, CI 1.338–9.456; p = 0.011) and having greater confidence in interpreting somatic results (OR 5.926, CI 2.230–15.74; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies, the majority of cancer physicians ordered somatic mutation tests. However, the percentage of patients on whom tests were ordered was low. Almost half respondents reported low genomic confidence. Somatic mutation test ordering was higher amongst oncologists and those with increased confidence in interpreting somatic variants. It is unclear whether genomically confident individuals ordered more tests or whether ordering more tests increased genomic confidence. Educational interventions could improve confidence and enhance test ordering behaviour.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7663861
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76638612020-11-13 Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician Demeshko, Anastassia Pennisi, David J. Narayan, Sushil Gray, Stacy W. Brown, Matthew A. McInerney-Leo, Aideen M. J Transl Med Research BACKGROUND: Clinical whole exome sequencing was introduced in an Australian centre in 2017, as an alternative to Sanger sequencing. We aimed to identify predictors of cancer physicians’ somatic mutation test ordering behaviour. METHODS: A validated instrument assessed somatic mutation test ordering, genomic confidence, perceived utility of tumour molecular profiling, and percent of patients eligible for targeted therapy. A cash incentive was included in 189/244 questionnaires which were mailed to all Queensland cancer specialists in November 2018. RESULTS: 110 participated (response rate 45%); 54.7% oncologists, and the remainder were surgeons, haematologists and pulmonologists. Oncologists were more likely to respond (p = 0.008), and cash incentive improved the response rate (p < 0.001). 67/102 (65.7%) of physicians ordered ≥ 5 somatic mutation tests annually. Oncologists saw 86.75 unique patients monthly and ordered 2.33 somatic mutation tests (2.2%). An average of 51/110 (46.1%) reported having little/no genomic confidence. Logistic regression identified two significant predictors of somatic mutation test ordering: being an oncologist (OR 3.557, CI 1.338–9.456; p = 0.011) and having greater confidence in interpreting somatic results (OR 5.926, CI 2.230–15.74; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies, the majority of cancer physicians ordered somatic mutation tests. However, the percentage of patients on whom tests were ordered was low. Almost half respondents reported low genomic confidence. Somatic mutation test ordering was higher amongst oncologists and those with increased confidence in interpreting somatic variants. It is unclear whether genomically confident individuals ordered more tests or whether ordering more tests increased genomic confidence. Educational interventions could improve confidence and enhance test ordering behaviour. BioMed Central 2020-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7663861/ /pubmed/33183308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02610-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Demeshko, Anastassia
Pennisi, David J.
Narayan, Sushil
Gray, Stacy W.
Brown, Matthew A.
McInerney-Leo, Aideen M.
Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title_full Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title_fullStr Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title_full_unstemmed Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title_short Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
title_sort factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7663861/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33183308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02610-7
work_keys_str_mv AT demeshkoanastassia factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician
AT pennisidavidj factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician
AT narayansushil factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician
AT graystacyw factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician
AT brownmatthewa factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician
AT mcinerneyleoaideenm factorsinfluencingcancergeneticsomaticmutationtestorderingbycancerphysician