Scott T. Walters, Ph.D.
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12503/31519
Browse
Browsing Scott T. Walters, Ph.D. by Author "Lin, Yong"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Randomized trial promoting cancer genetic risk assessment when genetic counseling cost removed: 1-year follow-up(Oxford University Press, 2024-03-16) An, Jinghua; McDougall, Jean; Lin, Yong; Lu, Shou-En; Walters, Scott T.; Heidt, Emily; Stroup, Antoinette; Paddock, Lisa; Grumet, Sherry; Toppmeyer, Deborah; Kinney, Anita Y.PURPOSE: Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian and high-risk breast cancer. However, the underutilization of CGRA has long been documented, and cost has been a major barrier. In this randomized controlled trial, a tailored counseling and navigation (TCN) intervention significantly improved CGRA uptake at 6-month follow-up, compared with targeted print (TP) and usual care (UC). We aimed to examine the effect of removing genetic counseling costs on CGRA uptake by 12 months. METHODS: We recruited racially and geographically diverse women with breast and ovarian cancer from cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TCN received telephone-based psychoeducation and navigation. After 6 months, the trial provided free genetic counseling to participants in all arms. RESULTS: At 12 months, more women in TCN obtained CGRA (26.6%) than those in TP (11.0%; odds ratio [OR] = 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.56 to 4.89) and UC (12.2%; OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.41 to 4.29). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. The Kaplan-Meier curve shows that the divergence of cumulative incidence slopes (TCN vs UC, TCN vs TP) appears primarily within the initial 6 months. CONCLUSION: TCN significantly increased CGRA uptake at the 12-month follow-up. Directly removing the costs of genetic counseling attenuated the effects of TCN, highlighting the critical enabling role played by cost coverage. Future policies and interventions should address multilevel cost-related barriers to expand patients' access to CGRA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with the NIH clinical trial registry, clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03326713. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03326713.Item Understanding cancer genetic risk assessment motivations in a remote tailored risk communication and navigation intervention randomized controlled trial(Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group, 2022-12-16) Le Compte, Circe G.; Lu, Shou-En; Ani, Julianne; McDougall, Jean; Walters, Scott T.; Toppmeyer, Deborah; Boyce, Tawny W.; Stroup, Antoinette; Paddock, Lisa; Grumet, Sherry; Lin, Yong; Heidt, Emily; Kinney, Anita Y.BACKGROUND: National guidelines recommend cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) (i.e. genetic counseling prior to genetic testing) for women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). Less than one-half of eligible women obtain CGRA, leaving thousands of women and their family members without access to potentially life-saving cancer prevention interventions. PURPOSE: The Genetic Risk Assessment for Cancer Education and Empowerment Project (GRACE) addressed this translational gap, testing the efficacy of a tailored counseling and navigation (TCN) intervention vs. a targeted print brochure vs. usual care on CGRA intentions. Selected behavioral variables were theorized to mediate CGRA intentions. METHODS: Breast and ovarian cancer survivors meeting criteria for guideline-based CGRA were recruited from three state cancer registries (N = 654), completed a baseline survey, and were randomized. TCN and targeted print arms received the brochure; TCN also participated in a tailored, telephone-based decision coaching and navigation session grounded in the Extended Parallel Process Model and Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Participants completed a one-month assessment. Logistic regression was used to compare the rate of CGRA intentions. CGRA intentions and theorized mediator scores (continuous level variables) were calculated using mixed model analysis. RESULTS: CGRA intentions increased for TCN (53.2%) vs. targeted print (26.7%) (OR = 3.129; 95% CI: 2.028, 4.827, p < .0001) and TCN vs. usual care (23.1%) (OR = 3.778, CI: 2.422, 5.894, p < .0001). Perceived risk (p = 0.023) and self-efficacy (p = 0.035) mediated CGRA intentions in TCN. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in CGRA intentions and theorized mediators support the use of a tailored communication intervention among women at increased HBOC risk. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03326713.)Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03326713.