Search results

The Cancer Genetics Network (CGN) is one of a growing number of large-scale registries designed to facilitate investigation of genetic and environmental contributions to health and disease. Despite compelling scientific and social justice arguments that recommend diverse participation in biomedical research, members of ethnic minority groups continue to be chronically underrepresented in such projects. The CGN studies reported in this issue used strategies well documented to increase minority participation in research activities, including use of community-targeted materials, addressing community trust concerns, and the adoption of personalized and flexible research protocols. Here, we review the outcome of these efforts to increase minority recruitment to the CGN, and ask what lessons the findings suggest for future minority recruitment initiatives.

Introduction: A traceback genetic testing program for ovarian cancer has the potential to identify individuals with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and their relatives. Successful implementation depends on understanding and addressing the experiences, barriers, and preferences of the people served. Methods: We conducted a remote, human-centered design research study of people with ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (probands) and people with a family history of ovarian cancer (relatives) at three integrated health systems between May and September 2021. Participants completed activities to elicit their preferences about ovarian cancer genetic testing messaging and to design their ideal experience receiving an invitation to participate in genetic testing. Interview data were analyzed using a rapid thematic analysis approach. Results: We interviewed 70 participants and identified five preferred experiences for a traceback program. Participants strongly prefer discussing genetic testing with their doctor but are comfortable discussing with other clinicians. The most highly preferred experience for both probands and relatives was to discuss with a knowledgeable clinician who could answer questions, followed by directed (sent directly to specific people) or passive (shared in a public area) communication. Repeated contact was acceptable for reminders. Conclusion: Participants were open to receiving information about traceback genetic testing and recognized its value. Participants preferred discussing genetic testing with a trusted clinician. Directed communication was preferable to passive communication. Other valued information included how genetic tests help their family and the cost of genetic testing. These findings are informing traceback cascade genetic testing programs at all three sites.