Optimizing participant and community engagement in cancer genomic sequencing research
- PMID: 40517303
- DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2025.101483
Optimizing participant and community engagement in cancer genomic sequencing research
Abstract
Purpose: We describe strategies implemented across research centers of the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network to optimize engagement of participants and communities in cancer genomics research. We also present consensus definitions of engagement and engagement optimization, informed by our shared experiences in the Network.
Methods: Key informant interviews and a document review identified engagement and optimization strategies across PE-CGS research centers. Findings were synthesized using qualitative content analysis. Consensus on definitions of engagement and optimization were developed through iterative review by PE-CGS members.
Results: PE-CGS research centers adopted tailored strategies based on community needs and scientific gaps. Engagement strategies included community-based efforts (eg, advisory boards and newsletters) and participant-focused approaches (eg, enhanced informed consent and decision support tools). Optimization strategies leveraged scientific methods (eg, randomized controlled trials and surveys) to evaluate engagement. Engagement was described as the sustained and meaningful interactions between researchers, participants, and communities. Optimization was described as the application of scientific methods to refine and improve engagement and research processes and outcomes.
Conclusion: Engagement and optimization strategies have informed research planning, conduct, and dissemination across PE-CGS. These approaches and definitions provide a foundation for developing evidence-based practices to strengthen participant and community involvement in cancer genomics research.
Keywords: Cancer Moonshot; Engagement; Genetics; Medical Oncology; Patient Participation.
Copyright © 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest Norah L. Crossnohere reports grants from Pfizer outside of the submitted work and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim. Anne L.R. Schuster reports grants from Pfizer outside of the submitted work; John F.P. Bridges reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim. Eliezer Van Allen reports personal fees from Enara Bio, Manifold Bio, Monte Rosa, Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research, Serinus Bio, and TracerDx and research support from Novartis, BMS, Sanofi, and NextPoint and equity in Tango Therapeutics, Genome Medical, Genomic Life, Enara Bio, Manifold Bio, Microsoft, Monte Rosa, Riva Therapeutics, Serinus Bio, Syapse, and TracerDx. Roel Verhaak reports equity in Boundless Bio. Elizabeth B. Claus is an advisory research board member to Servier Pharmaceuticals. John D. Carpten reports personal fees from Stand Up to Cancer Scientific Advisory Committee, BreakThrough Cancer Scientific Advisory Board; and personal fees from Roche/Genentech Advancing Inclusive Research External Advisory Board outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest.