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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |