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
. 2025 Mar 3;8(3):e250185.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0185.

Strategies to Assess Risk for Hereditary Cancer in Primary Care Clinics: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Elizabeth M Swisher  1 , Heather M Harris  2 , Sarah Knerr  3 , Tesla N Theoryn  4   2 , Barbara M Norquist  1 , Jeannine Brant  5   6 , Brian H Shirts  4   7 , Faith Beers  2 , DaLaina Cameron  2 , Emerson J Dusic  2   4 , Laurie A Riemann  5 , Beth Devine  8   9 , Michael L Raff  10 , Rabindra Kadel  11 , Howard J Cabral  12 , Catharine Wang  13
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Strategies to Assess Risk for Hereditary Cancer in Primary Care Clinics: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Elizabeth M Swisher et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Best practices for improving access to assessment of hereditary cancer risk in primary care are lacking.

Objective: To compare 2 population-based engagement strategies for identifying primary care patients with a family or personal history of cancer and offering eligible individuals genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.

Design, setting, and participants: The EDGE (Early Detection of Genetic Risk) clinical trial cluster-randomized 12 clinics from 2 health care systems in Montana, Wyoming, and Washington state to 1 of 2 engagement approaches for assessment of hereditary cancer risk in primary care. The study population included 95 623 English-speaking patients at least 25 years old with a primary care visit during the recruitment window between April 1, 2021, and March 31, 2022.

Intervention: The intervention comprised 2 risk assessment engagement approaches: (1) point of care (POC), conducted by staff immediately preceding clinical appointments, and (2) direct patient engagement (DPE), where letter and email outreach facilitated at-home completion. Patients who completed risk assessment and met prespecified criteria were offered genetic testing via a home-delivered saliva testing kit at no cost.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with a visit who (1) completed the risk assessment and (2) completed genetic testing. Logistic regression models were used to compare the POC and DPE approaches, allowing for overdispersion and including clinic as a design factor. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to evaluate primary outcomes.

Results: Over a 12-month window, 95 623 patients had a primary care visit across the 12 clinics. Those who completed the risk assessment (n = 13 705) were predominately female (64.7%) and aged between 65 and 84 years (39.6%). The POC approach resulted in a higher proportion of patients completing risk assessment than the DPE approach (19.1% vs 8.7%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.68; 95% CI, 1.72-4.17; P < .001) but a similar proportion completing testing (1.5% vs 1.6%; AOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.64-1.46; P = .86). Among those eligible for testing, POC test completion was approximately half of that for the DPE approach (24.7% vs 44.7%; AOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.64; P < .001). The proportion of tested patients identified with an actionable pathogenic variant was significantly lower for the POC approach than the DPE approach (3.8% vs 6.6%; AOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85; P = .003).

Conclusions and relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial of risk assessment delivery, POC engagement resulted in a higher rate of assessment of hereditary cancer risk than the DPE approach but a similar rate of genetic testing completion. Using a combination of engagement strategies may be the optimal approach for greater reach and impact.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746794.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Shirts reported personal fees from Constantiam Biosiences outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Flow Diagram
Flow diagram for the trial showing patient numbers in each arm through the different steps of the study and reasons for dropout at each level. PCP indicates primary care physician.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Jahn A, Rump A, Widmann TJ, et al. . Comprehensive cancer predisposition testing within the prospective MASTER trial identifies hereditary cancer patients and supports treatment decisions for rare cancers. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(11):1186-1199. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Domchek SM, Friebel TM, Singer CF, et al. . Association of risk-reducing surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with cancer risk and mortality. JAMA. 2010;304(9):967-975. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1237 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force . Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(4):271-281. doi:10.7326/M13-2747 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Evans DG, Harkness EF, Howell A, et al. . Intensive breast screening in BRCA2 mutation carriers is associated with reduced breast cancer specific and all cause mortality. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2016;14:8. doi:10.1186/s13053-016-0048-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lindberg LJ, Rasmussen M, Andersen KK, Nilbert M, Therkildsen C. Benefit from extended surveillance interval on colorectal cancer risk in Lynch syndrome. Colorectal Dis. 2020;22(5):529-536. doi:10.1111/codi.14926 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data