Skip to content

Genetic Counseling Patient Preference Intervention Versus Conventional Genetic Counseling for Women at Elevated Risk for Breast Cancer

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a Genetic Counseling Patient Preference Intervention vs. Conventional Genetic Counseling for Women at Elevated Risk for Breast Cancer

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05325151
Enrollment
874
Registered
2022-04-13
Start date
2022-06-13
Completion date
2026-09-30
Last updated
2026-07-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Breast Carcinoma

Brief summary

This stage I clinical trial compares a genetic counseling patient preference (GCPP) intervention via EHR MyChart patient portal to conventional genetic counseling for women at elevated risk for breast cancer. Women at elevated breast cancer risk may be offered genetic counseling and genetic testing to further define whether they are at high risk (e.g. hereditary risk; BRCA mutation positive); moderate risk (e.g. risk based largely on family history and/or polygenic risk score) or average risk (e.g. general population). Genetic counseling may improve basic genetic knowledge, produce more accurate risk perceptions and tailor recommendations for greater perceived personal control regarding breast cancer risk. A single approach to genetic counseling may not fit the needs for all patients, and genetic counseling models that increase access to genetic testing and are more patient-centered may better serve patients. This trial may help researchers determine if a GCPP intervention can take the place of conventional genetic counseling, while being non-inferior in terms of adherence to screening recommendations, breast cancer genetic knowledge, accurate perception of risk, breast cancer-specific worry, and satisfaction with counseling compared to conventional genetic counseling. Study results will provide the efficacy for using a novel cancer genetic counseling approach via EHR MyChart patient portal that will be readily adaptable to other health care systems in the future, inform best practices, and reduce workforce burden.

Detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. Determine the efficacy of genetic counseling patient preference (GCPP) compared to conventional genetic counseling for adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for having: 1) a clinical encounter every 6-12 months; and 2) an annual mammogram (and breast magnetic resonance imaging \[MRI\] with contrast if recommended). II. Determine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling for adherence to other NCCN recommended cancer screening (e.g. colorectal cancer screening). III. Determine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling on breast cancer genetic knowledge, the accurate perception of breast cancer risk, breast cancer-specific worry, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVE: I. Explore the genetic counseling preferences among the GCPP group. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients receive GCPP intervention which uses REDCap and the MyChart patient portal to: 1) deliver a series of educational videos on pre-genetic test information; 2) provide multigene and polygenic risk score (PRS) test results; 3) obtain information about patients' questions/concerns about test results to use in post-genetic test counseling; and 4) determine patient preference (e.g. telehealth) for receipt of post-genetic test counseling. ARM II: Patients receive conventional genetic counseling with utilization of multigene and polygenic risk score (PRS) test results.

Interventions

OTHEREducational Intervention

Receive GCPP intervention videos

OTHERGenetic Counseling

Receive genetic counseling

OTHERSurvey Administration

Ancillary studies

Sponsors

Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center
Lead SponsorOTHER
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
CollaboratorNIH

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
30 Years to 64 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Being female. * Ages 30-64. * Being an Ohio State University (OSU) patient who uses MyChart. * Undergoing routine screening mammography. * Normal BI-RADS1. * At elevated breast cancer risk by the Cancer Risk Assessment (CRA) tool. * Able to read and speak English. * Provide consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Previous genetic counseling. * Previous genetic testing for cancer risk or known mutation in a breast cancer gene: ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, CHEK2, NBN, PALB2, PTEN, TP53. * Previous diagnosis of breast or ovarian cancer or personal history of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) or breast hyperplasia (with or without atypia). * Being a member of a focus group that assisted with the development of the intervention.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines of having a clinical encounter every 6-12 monthsUp to 14 monthsNon-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of genetic counseling patient preference (GCCP) versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin. Will use mixed effects logistic regression with adherence as the outcome, random intercept effects for genetic counselors, and fixed effects for study arm, breast cancer knowledge, breast cancer worry, post-test/counseling distress, and perception of breast cancer risk.
Adherence to NCCN guidelines of having an annual mammogram (and breast magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] with contrast if recommended)Up to 14 monthsNon-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin. Will use mixed effects logistic regression with adherence as the outcome, random intercept effects for genetic counselors, and fixed effects for study arm, breast cancer knowledge, breast cancer worry, post-test/counseling distress, and perception of breast cancer risk.
Risk perceptionUp to 14 monthsDetermine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling on breast cancer genetic knowledge, the accurate perception of breast cancer risk, breast cancer-specific worry, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling. Non-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin.
Breast cancer-specific worryUp to 14 monthsDetermine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling on breast cancer genetic knowledge, the accurate perception of breast cancer risk, breast cancer-specific worry, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling. Non-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin.
Post-test/counseling distressUp to 14 monthsDetermine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling on breast cancer genetic knowledge, the accurate perception of breast cancer risk, breast cancer-specific worry, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling. Non-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin.
Satisfaction with counselingUp to 14 monthsDetermine the efficacy of the GCPP compared to conventional genetic counseling on breast cancer genetic knowledge, the accurate perception of breast cancer risk, breast cancer-specific worry, post-test/counseling distress, and satisfaction with counseling. Non-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Adherence to other National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommended cancer screening (e.g. colorectal cancer screening)Up to 14 monthsNon-inferiority will be assessed by constructing a one-sided 95% confidence interval for the effect of GCCP versus conventional counseling and comparing the bound to a non-inferiority margin.

Countries

United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORKevin Sweet, MS, LGC

Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jul 7, 2026