Adapting a Theoretically-Based Intervention for Underserved Clinical Populations at Increased Risk for Hereditary Cancer: Lessons Learned from the Experience

Overview

Journal Prev Med Rep

Date 2022 Jul 20

PMID 35855922

Authors

Alejandra Hurtado-de-Mendoza

Valerie F Reyna

Christopher R Wolfe

Sara Gomez-Trillos

Arnethea L Sutton

Ashleigh Brennan

Vanessa B Sheppard

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Minorities at increased risk for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) frequently have low awareness and use of genetic counseling and testing (GCT). Making sure that evidence-based interventions (EBIs) reach minorities is key to reduce disparities. is a theory-informed EBI that has been proven to be efficacious in mostly non-Hispanic White non-clinical populations. We conducted formative work to inform adaptations of for use in clinical settings with at-risk diverse women.

Methods: Genetic counselors (n = 20) were recruited nationally; at-risk Latinas and Blacks (n = 21) were recruited in Washington DC and Virginia. They completed the EBI between April 2018 - September 2019. Participants completed an acceptability scale and an interview to provide suggestions about implementation adaptations. T-tests for independent samples compared acceptability between at-risk women and genetic counselors. The Consensual Qualitative Research Framework was used to code adaptation suggestions. Suggested adaptations were discussed by a multidisciplinary team to integrate fidelity and adaptation considerations.

Results: At-risk women had a significantly higher acceptability ( = 4.17, = 0.47 vs. = 3.24, = 0.64; = 0.000; scale 1-5) and satisfaction scores ( = 8.3, = 1.3 vs. = 4.2, = 2.0; = 0.000; scale 1-10) than genetic counselors. Genetic counselors and at-risk women suggested contextual (e.g. format) and content (e.g. shortening) adaptations to enhance the fit of for diverse clinical populations.

Conclusions: Findings illustrate the process of integrating fidelity and adaptation considerations to ensure that EBIs retain their core components while enhancing the fit to minoritized clinical populations. Future studies will test the efficacy of the adapted in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Citing Articles

Cultural adaptations to a telephone genetic counseling protocol and booklet for Latina breast cancer survivors at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Gomez-Trillos S, Graves K, Fiallos K, Schwartz M, Peshkin B, Hamilton H Transl Behav Med. 2023; 13(5):297-308.

PMID: 36694918 PMC: 10182423. DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibac106.

References

Wolfe C, Reyna V, Widmer C, Cedillos E, Fisher C, Brust-Renck P . Efficacy of a web-based intelligent tutoring system for communicating genetic risk of breast cancer: a fuzzy-trace theory approach. Med Decis Making. 2014; 35(1):46-59. PMC: 4232483. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14535983. View

Donovan K, Tucker D . Knowledge about genetic risk for breast cancer and perceptions of genetic testing in a sociodemographically diverse sample. J Behav Med. 2000; 23(1):15-36. DOI: 10.1023/a:1005416203239. View

Tariman J, Berry D, Halpenny B, Wolpin S, Schepp K . Validation and testing of the Acceptability E-scale for web-based patient-reported outcomes in cancer care. Appl Nurs Res. 2010; 24(1):53-8. PMC: 3030937. DOI: 10.1016/j.apnr.2009.04.003. View

Hughes C, Gomez-Caminero A, Benkendorf J, Kerner J, Isaacs C, Barter J . Ethnic differences in knowledge and attitudes about BRCA1 testing in women at increased risk. Patient Educ Couns. 1997; 32(1-2):51-62. DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(97)00064-5. View

Liberali J, Reyna V, Furlan S, Stein L, Pardo S . Individual Differences in Numeracy and Cognitive Reflection, with Implications for Biases and Fallacies in Probability Judgment. J Behav Decis Mak. 2013; 25(4):361-381. PMC: 3716015. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.752. View

Armstrong K . Equity in Precision Medicine: Is It Within Our Reach?. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2017; 15(3):421-423. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2017.0039. View

Lu Y, Serpas L, Genter P, Anderson B, Campa D, Ipp E . Divergent Perceptions of Barriers to Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Among Patients and Care Providers, Los Angeles, California, 2014-2015. Prev Chronic Dis. 2016; 13:E140. PMC: 5055399. DOI: 10.5888/pcd13.160193. View

Evans C, Hamilton R, Tercyak K, Peshkin B, Rabemananjara K, Isaacs C . Understanding the Needs of Young Women Regarding Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Genetic Testing: Convergence and Divergence among Patient-Counselor Perceptions and the Promise of Peer Support. Healthcare (Basel). 2016; 4(3). PMC: 5041036. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare4030035. View

Hoskovec J, Bennett R, Carey M, DaVanzo J, Dougherty M, Hahn S . Projecting the Supply and Demand for Certified Genetic Counselors: a Workforce Study. J Genet Couns. 2017; 27(1):16-20. DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0158-8. View

10.

Joseph G, Lee R, Pasick R, Guerra C, Schillinger D, Rubin S . Effective communication in the era of precision medicine: A pilot intervention with low health literacy patients to improve genetic counseling communication. Eur J Med Genet. 2018; 62(5):357-367. PMC: 7213493. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.12.004. View

11.

Rothman A, Sheeran P . The operating conditions framework: Integrating mechanisms and moderators in health behavior interventions. Health Psychol. 2020; 40(12):845-857. DOI: 10.1037/hea0001026. View

12.

Gammon A, Rothwell E, Simmons R, Lowery J, Ballinger L, Hill D . Awareness and preferences regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing among Latinas and non-Latina white women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns. 2011; 20(6):625-38. PMC: 7373795. DOI: 10.1007/s10897-011-9376-7. View

13.

Reyna V . A scientific theory of gist communication and misinformation resistance, with implications for health, education, and policy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 118(15). PMC: 8054009. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1912441117. View

14.

Blalock S, Reyna V . Using fuzzy-trace theory to understand and improve health judgments, decisions, and behaviors: A literature review. Health Psychol. 2016; 35(8):781-792. PMC: 4979567. DOI: 10.1037/hea0000384. View

15.

Kinney A, Simonsen S, Baty B, Mandal D, Neuhausen S, Seggar K . Acceptance of genetic testing for hereditary breast ovarian cancer among study enrollees from an African American kindred. Am J Med Genet A. 2006; 140(8):813-26. PMC: 2562369. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31162. View

16.

Griner D, Smith T . Culturally adapted mental health intervention: A meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2011; 43(4):531-48. DOI: 10.1037/0033-3204.43.4.531. View

17.

Smith N, Liu S . A systematic review of the dose-response relationship between usage and outcomes of online physical activity weight-loss interventions. Internet Interv. 2020; 22:100344. PMC: 7516044. DOI: 10.1016/j.invent.2020.100344. View

18.

Rebbeck T, Lynch H, Neuhausen S, Narod S, Veer L, Garber J . Prophylactic oophorectomy in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med. 2002; 346(21):1616-22. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa012158. View

19.

Joseph G, Pasick R, Schillinger D, Luce J, Guerra C, Cheng J . Information Mismatch: Cancer Risk Counseling with Diverse Underserved Patients. J Genet Couns. 2017; 26(5):1090-1104. PMC: 5582075. DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0089-4. View

20.

Farmer M, Bonadies D, Mahon S, Baker M, Ghate S, Munro C . Adverse Events in Genetic Testing: The Fourth Case Series. Cancer J. 2019; 25(4):231-236. DOI: 10.1097/PPO.0000000000000391. View