Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 Sep 3;33(9):1185-1193.
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-24-0147.

Testing a Population-Based Outreach Intervention for Ovarian Cancer Survivors to Encourage their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic Counseling

Yue Guan  1 , Colleen M McBride  1 , Jingsong Zhao  1 , Rebecca D Pentz  2 , Cam Escoffery  1 , Yuan Liu  3 , Yichun Cao  3 , Weihua An  4 , James A Shepperd  5 , Kevin C Ward  6
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Testing a Population-Based Outreach Intervention for Ovarian Cancer Survivors to Encourage their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic Counseling

Yue Guan et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. .

Abstract

Background: Most relatives of women with ovarian cancer are unaware of their increased risk for cancer and their eligibility for genetic counseling. State cancer registries offer a platform to communicate about inherited risk to this population.

Methods: We conducted a two-arm randomized trial to test a theory-based communication intervention-Your Family Connects (YFC)-compared to the standard Georgia Cancer Registry (GCR) contact. A total of 1,938 eligible ovarian cancer survivors were randomly assigned to either the YFC arm (n = 969) or the Standard Care arm (n = 969). We assessed the number of ovarian cancer survivors and their close relatives who logged on to the study website by arm.

Results: Survivor reach was significantly higher in the Standard Care arm than YFC (20.8% vs. 15.2%, respectively; P < 0.001). However, reach to relatives was limited to listed relatives in the YFC arm (n = 20, 13.2%), with little participation from those in the Standard Care arm (n = 1, 0.4%). Pooling across arms, minority race, longer time since diagnosis, and older age were all significantly associated with a decreased likelihood that the survivor accessed the website.

Conclusions: The YFC intervention showed lower effectiveness for engaging survivors but was more effective than Standard Care in engaging at-risk relatives. Other factors (e.g., time since diagnosis) associated with lower reach must be considered in refining future outreach approaches.

Impact: Partnering with a state cancer registry to foster family communication about inherited cancer risk is feasible but the possibility for broad population reach warrants further testing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
CONSORT 2010 flow diagram. This flowchart details the progress through the phases of a randomized trial including enrollment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and data analysis following the CONSORT 2010 guidelines.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Key components of the YFC intervention and theoretical constructs. This illustration outlines the main elements of the YFC intervention and the theoretical framework underpinning it.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Intervention flow diagram. This diagram shows the process involved in the implementation of the intervention.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Norquist BM, Harrell MI, Brady MF, Walsh T, Lee MK, Gulsuner S, et al. Inherited mutations in women with ovarian carcinoma. JAMA Oncol 2016;2:482–90. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gaff CL, Clarke AJ, Atkinson P, Sivell S, Elwyn G, Iredale R, et al. Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2007;15:999–1011. - PubMed
    1. Wiseman M, Dancyger C, Michie S. Communicating genetic risk information within families: a review. Fam Cancer 2010;9:691–703. - PubMed
    1. Chivers Seymour K, Addington-Hall J, Lucassen AM, Foster CL. What facilitates or impedes family communication following genetic testing for cancer risk? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of primary qualitative research. J Genet Couns 2010;19:330–42. - PubMed
    1. Nycum G, Avard D, Knoppers BM. Factors influencing intrafamilial communication of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic information. Eur J Hum Genet 2009;17:872–80. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types