Cargando…

Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential

Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), an emerging biomarker for personalized risk-directed interventions, is increased in cancer survivors. However, little is known about patient preferences for CHIP testing. We surveyed participants in a prospective cohort study of young women wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sella, Tal, Fell, Geoffrey G., Miller, Peter G., Gibson, Christopher J., Rosenberg, Shoshana M., Snow, Craig, Stover, Daniel G., Ruddy, Kathryn J., Peppercorn, Jeffrey M., Schapira, Lidia, Borges, Virginia F., Come, Steven E., Warner, Ellen, Frank, Elizabeth, Neuberg, Donna S., Ebert, Benjamin L., Partridge, Ann H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The American Society of Hematology 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9791300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36129839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2022008376
_version_ 1784859376056532992
author Sella, Tal
Fell, Geoffrey G.
Miller, Peter G.
Gibson, Christopher J.
Rosenberg, Shoshana M.
Snow, Craig
Stover, Daniel G.
Ruddy, Kathryn J.
Peppercorn, Jeffrey M.
Schapira, Lidia
Borges, Virginia F.
Come, Steven E.
Warner, Ellen
Frank, Elizabeth
Neuberg, Donna S.
Ebert, Benjamin L.
Partridge, Ann H.
author_facet Sella, Tal
Fell, Geoffrey G.
Miller, Peter G.
Gibson, Christopher J.
Rosenberg, Shoshana M.
Snow, Craig
Stover, Daniel G.
Ruddy, Kathryn J.
Peppercorn, Jeffrey M.
Schapira, Lidia
Borges, Virginia F.
Come, Steven E.
Warner, Ellen
Frank, Elizabeth
Neuberg, Donna S.
Ebert, Benjamin L.
Partridge, Ann H.
author_sort Sella, Tal
collection PubMed
description Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), an emerging biomarker for personalized risk-directed interventions, is increased in cancer survivors. However, little is known about patient preferences for CHIP testing. We surveyed participants in a prospective cohort study of young women with breast cancer (BC). The emailed survey included an introduction to CHIP and a vignette eliciting participants’ preferences for CHIP testing, considering sequentially: population-based 10-year risk of BC recurrence, hematologic malignancy, and heart disease; increased CHIP-associated risks; current CHIP management; dedicated CHIP clinic; and hypothetical CHIP treatment. Preference changes were evaluated using the McNemar test. The survey response rate was 82.2% (528/642). Median age at time of survey was 46 years and median time from diagnosis was 108 months. Only 5.9% had prior knowledge of CHIP. After vignette presentation, most survivors (87.1%) recommended CHIP testing for the vignette patient. Presented next with CHIP-independent, population-based risks, 11.1% shifted their preference from testing to not testing. After receiving information about CHIP-associated risks, an additional 10.1% shifted their preference to testing. Preference for testing increased if vignette patient was offered a CHIP clinic or hypothetical CHIP treatment, with 7.2% and 14.1% switching preferences toward testing, respectively. Finally, 75.8% of participants desired CHIP testing for themselves. Among participants, 28.2% reported that learning about CHIP caused at least moderate anxiety. Most young survivors favored CHIP testing, with preferences influenced by risk presentation and potential management strategies. Our findings highlight the importance of risk communication and psychosocial support when considering biomarkers for future risk in cancer survivors. This trial has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01468246.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9791300
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The American Society of Hematology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97913002022-12-28 Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential Sella, Tal Fell, Geoffrey G. Miller, Peter G. Gibson, Christopher J. Rosenberg, Shoshana M. Snow, Craig Stover, Daniel G. Ruddy, Kathryn J. Peppercorn, Jeffrey M. Schapira, Lidia Borges, Virginia F. Come, Steven E. Warner, Ellen Frank, Elizabeth Neuberg, Donna S. Ebert, Benjamin L. Partridge, Ann H. Blood Adv Regular Article Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), an emerging biomarker for personalized risk-directed interventions, is increased in cancer survivors. However, little is known about patient preferences for CHIP testing. We surveyed participants in a prospective cohort study of young women with breast cancer (BC). The emailed survey included an introduction to CHIP and a vignette eliciting participants’ preferences for CHIP testing, considering sequentially: population-based 10-year risk of BC recurrence, hematologic malignancy, and heart disease; increased CHIP-associated risks; current CHIP management; dedicated CHIP clinic; and hypothetical CHIP treatment. Preference changes were evaluated using the McNemar test. The survey response rate was 82.2% (528/642). Median age at time of survey was 46 years and median time from diagnosis was 108 months. Only 5.9% had prior knowledge of CHIP. After vignette presentation, most survivors (87.1%) recommended CHIP testing for the vignette patient. Presented next with CHIP-independent, population-based risks, 11.1% shifted their preference from testing to not testing. After receiving information about CHIP-associated risks, an additional 10.1% shifted their preference to testing. Preference for testing increased if vignette patient was offered a CHIP clinic or hypothetical CHIP treatment, with 7.2% and 14.1% switching preferences toward testing, respectively. Finally, 75.8% of participants desired CHIP testing for themselves. Among participants, 28.2% reported that learning about CHIP caused at least moderate anxiety. Most young survivors favored CHIP testing, with preferences influenced by risk presentation and potential management strategies. Our findings highlight the importance of risk communication and psychosocial support when considering biomarkers for future risk in cancer survivors. This trial has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01468246. The American Society of Hematology 2022-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9791300/ /pubmed/36129839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2022008376 Text en © 2022 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Regular Article
Sella, Tal
Fell, Geoffrey G.
Miller, Peter G.
Gibson, Christopher J.
Rosenberg, Shoshana M.
Snow, Craig
Stover, Daniel G.
Ruddy, Kathryn J.
Peppercorn, Jeffrey M.
Schapira, Lidia
Borges, Virginia F.
Come, Steven E.
Warner, Ellen
Frank, Elizabeth
Neuberg, Donna S.
Ebert, Benjamin L.
Partridge, Ann H.
Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title_full Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title_fullStr Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title_full_unstemmed Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title_short Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
title_sort patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential
topic Regular Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9791300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36129839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2022008376
work_keys_str_mv AT sellatal patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT fellgeoffreyg patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT millerpeterg patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT gibsonchristopherj patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT rosenbergshoshanam patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT snowcraig patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT stoverdanielg patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT ruddykathrynj patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT peppercornjeffreym patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT schapiralidia patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT borgesvirginiaf patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT comestevene patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT warnerellen patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT frankelizabeth patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT neubergdonnas patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT ebertbenjaminl patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential
AT partridgeannh patientperspectivesontestingforclonalhematopoiesisofindeterminatepotential