Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 17, 2025
Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
Published on: June 21, 2018
Considering Clinical Implementation of Polygenic Scores in Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment: Recipients'
Rebecca Purvis1,2, Natalie Taylor3, Paul James1,2
1Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Background:
Polygenic scores (PGS) capture a proportion of the genomic liability for cancer in unselected and high-risk cohorts, with meaningful application in improving risk-stratified screening and management. However, there are significant evidence gaps regarding future clinical implementation. Despite being key interest-holders, recipient views are underrepresented. The objective of this study was to explore recipients' views on the clinical implementation of PGS for hereditary cancer risk assessment in Australian cancer genetics clinics.
Methods:
Three video-conferenced focus groups were conducted with recipients who had been given their breast and ovarian cancer PGS through the PRiMo trial. Nominal Group Technique was used to enable evaluation of implementation determinants and strategies, and priority setting. Descriptive and deductive content analyses were conducted utilising the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation of facilitative strategies.
Results:
Participants (N = 10) were female, with an average age of 36 years (range 18-70 years). Of these, 50% (N = 5) experienced a change in their hereditary cancer risk assessment due to their PGS. Participants prioritised the positive value and impact of PGS, and the behavioural characteristics of recipients, notably their knowledge and expectations of PGS and cancer genetics clinics, as major determinants of implementation success. Implementation strategies that prepared and supported recipients to access, engage, and use PGS were emphasised, with a focus on a clear results report, educational resources, in-clinic resources, and delivery of ongoing good clinical follow-up.
Conclusion:
Evidence-based strategies should be deployed to address recipients' priority barriers to the clinical implementation of PGS for hereditary cancer risk assessment. Centralising recipient voices in implementation design will improve effectiveness and success.
More Related Videos
08:15gDNA Enrichment by a Transposase-based Technology for NGS Analysis of the Whole Sequence of BRCA1, BRCA2, and 9 Genes Involved in DNA Damage Repair
Published on: October 6, 2014
07:31Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Related Concept Videos
02:59Cancer Prevention
Some...
01:28Human Genetics
The complex relationship between genetics and psychology is observable through common biological components such...
01:18Polygenic Traits
01:23Behavioral Genetics and Its Designs
The primary methodologies used in behavior genetics include family studies, twin studies, and adoption studies, each providing unique...
01:06Heritability
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...