Solid Tumor, AdultGENESISNCT06436157
A Pilot Study of Genetic Testing Uptake Through Enhanced Oncology Nurse-Led Intervention
A study testing Enhanced education in people with Solid Tumor, Adult, run by University of California, Davis at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
Genetic factors are a significant determinant of the likelihood of developing various types of cancers. Identification of germline risk can have important implications for both patients and their families. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Solid Tumor, Adult
- What is being tested?
- Enhanced education
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 26 Dec 2024to 26 Sep 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults (≥ 18 years)
- Diagnosed with a solid tumor cancer type that has established guidelines suggesting the utility of genetic testing in treatment (breast, ovarian, prostate, pancreatic, colon, Lynch syndrome-related cancers (colorectal, endometrial, gastric, ovarian, pancreatic, urothelial, brain (usually glioblastoma), biliary tract, small intestine), Li-Fraumeni syndrome tumor spectrum (e.g., soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, central nervous system tumors, breast cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma), etc.)
- Eligible for GCT based on the current NCCN guidelines
- Starting new systemic therapy or switching systemic therapy
- Eligible for GCT as per the current NCCN guidelines
- No prior genetic testing (or tested before 2014)
Who cannot join
- Prior GCT with test results available (if tested 2014 onwards)
- Patients scheduled for treatment education with Advanced Practice Provider (typically reserved for more complex regimens)
- Patients with cognitive impairments or severe psychological disorders that would limit their ability to understand the genetic counseling/testing information or give informed consent.
- Any other condition that would, in the investigator's judgment, contraindicate the patient's participation in the clinical study due to safety concerns with clinical study procedures (e.g., patients requiring urgent therapy and/or inpatient chemotherapy initiation).
- Patients who are currently participating in other clinical trials that could confound the outcomes of genetic testing uptake.
- Prospective participants who, in the investigator's opinion, may not be able to comply with all study procedures (including compliance issues related to logistics).
- Hematologic malignancy
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States2 sites, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Enloe Regional Cancer Center
Chico, California, 95926
Grant Harris, BS, 530-332-3858, grant.harris@enloe.org
Ranjan Pathak, MD
- Active, not recruiting
University of California, Davis
Sacramento, California, 95616
About this study
Official title: Genetic Testing Uptake Through an Enhanced Oncology Nurse-Led Intervention in Patients With Solid Tumors (GENESIS): A Pilot Study
Genetic factors are a significant determinant of the likelihood of developing various types of cancers. Identification of germline risk can have important implications for both patients and their families. Although estimates vary, pathogenic germline variants can be seen in ~3-17.5% of unselected patients with cancer with important clinical significance. Unfortunately, despite progress in multigene testing and the identification of heritable conditions, genetic counseling and testing (GCT) remains underutilized among cancer patients. Although there are multiple barriers to low testing, initial referral to GCT from the treating oncologist has been noted to be the most significant barrier.
Nurse navigation has been shown to improve the timeliness of cancer care and patient outcomes across various cancer types and improve the uptake of genomic testing in cancer patients. Despite proven benefits, community cancer centers often face resource limitations that prevent them from consistently assigning a dedicated nurse navigator to cancer patients. However, community centers universally have oncology nurses who routinely educate patients about their systemic therapies. By enhancing the "therapy education" sessions, the investigators hypothesize that oncology nurses can bridge this gap and potentially identify eligible patients, provide essential education on the importance of genetic testing, and facilitate the referral process. The investigators propose a pilot randomized study to evaluate the potential effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of a novel, nurse-led "enhanced education" intervention specifically designed to increase the uptake of GCT in adult cancer patients.
Read the detailed description
Identification of germline risk can have important implications for both patients and their families: it can help patients develop tailored cancer surveillance, risk-reducing measures, reproductive planning, identify novel genotype-directed drug targets, and also optimally address the risk of malignancy in at-risk relatives. Although estimates vary, pathogenic germline variants (PGV) can be seen in ~3-17.5% of unselected patients with cancer with important clinical significance. Although national and international guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) outline the criteria for who should be offered genetic counseling and testing (GCT) based on a patient's personal and/or family history, recent studies have found that broader testing of at-risk patients might help identify PGV in patients who otherwise would not have met guidelines for genetic testing.
Unfortunately, despite progress in multigene testing and the identification of heritable conditions, GCT remains underutilized among cancer patients. A recent study revealed that the uptake of germline testing among cancer patients remains strikingly low; in California and Georgia, between 2013 and 2019, less than 7% of patients diagnosed with cancer underwent such testing. While a study indicates a promising recent increase in the use of germline testing among women diagnosed with breast and ovarian cancer from 2012 to 2019, there is still a significant gap in ensuring that all eligible patients are provided with GCT. Although there are multiple barriers to low testing, initial referral to GCT from the treating oncologist has been noted to be the most significant barrier.
Community cancer centers are crucial in providing accessible care to a large segment of the cancer patient population. However, community cancer centers often face various challenges with limited resources for specialized genetic services variability in community oncologists' practice patterns and perceptions in GCT, and potentially urban-rural variability in patient awareness and understanding of the potential impact of genetic testing on their care.
Nurse navigation has been shown to improve the timeliness of cancer care and patient outcomes across various cancer types, in addition to improving the uptake of genomic testing in cancer patients. Despite proven benefits, community cancer centers often face resource limitations that prevent them from consistently assigning a dedicated nurse navigator to cancer patients. However, community centers universally have oncology nurses who routinely educate patients about their systemic therapies. By enhancing the "therapy education" sessions, the investigators hypothesize that oncology nurses can bridge this gap and potentially identify eligible patients, provide essential education on the importance of genetic testing, and facilitate the referral process. This approach leverages the trust and communication between nurses and patients and the principle that informed patients are more likely to engage in their healthcare decisions to potentially overcome barriers to genetic testing uptake.
The investigators propose a pilot randomized study to evaluate the potential effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of a novel, nurse-led "enhanced education" intervention specifically designed to increase the uptake of GCT in adult cancer patients. Patients in the enhanced education arm will be scheduled for an enhanced therapy education session with a trained oncology nurse for patients starting or switching their systemic therapies. In addition to the education conducted as part of the usual care, the nurse will: 1) provide detailed education on GCT; and 2) if the patient is eligible and agreeable to GCT, order a referral to GCT (if not already ordered). Nurses will provide a "nudge" to the referral coordinators within a week of the education session to ensure the referral process is completed.
- Conditions
- Solid Tumor, Adult
- Being tested
- Enhanced education, Usual care education
- Keywords
- Genetic Counseling and Testing, NCCN guidelines, Utilization, Feasibility, Nurse-led care coordination
- Medical subject headings
- Patient Acceptance of Health Care
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Enhanced educationOther
In addition to the education conducted as part of usual care, the nurse will: 1) provide basic education on GCT; and 2) if the patient is eligible and agreeable to GCT, place a referral to GCT (if not already ordered).
Patients will also be provided with written materials reinforcing the key messages of GCT education, designed to be understandable to individuals without a medical background. Nurses will also conduct a follow-up "nudge" by sending an in basket message via electronic medical record to ensure that the referrals are processed by the referral coordinators.
Usual care educationOther
A brief introduction to GCT will be provided in accordance with the information covered in the "chemo education binder," which is the current standard of care at Enloe Regional Cancer Center. As per the usual care, referrals for genetic testing will be clinician-initiated without the proactive involvement of the RN.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Enhanced Education Intervention | Experimental | Patients in the enhanced education intervention arm will be scheduled for a redesigned therapy education session with a trained oncology nurse. Receives: Other: Enhanced education |
| Usual Care Education Arm | Active comparator | Patients in this arm will receive the usual care education provided to cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy, which includes information on treatment options, side effects, and support services without targeted genetic testing education. Receives: Other: Usual care education |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Percentage of patients in each arm who proceed to GCT consultation following the intervention.
Measured: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Secondary outcomes (3)
Percentage of patients in each arm referred to GCT
Measured: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Average time from GCT referral order to GCT consultation
Measured: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Average time from GCT consultation to completion of genetic testing
Measured: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 May 2024
- Study start26 Dec 2024
- Primary completion26 Mar 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion26 Sep 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (11)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Solid Tumor, AdultStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, DavisThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This pilot study will randomize patients who are starting or switching their systemic therapies for solid cancers, eligible for GCT, and have not undergone prior genetic testing into two groups: "enhanced education intervention" and "usual care education".
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Davis
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Enloe Regional Cancer Center
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Ranjan Pathak, MD MHS, Principal investigator, Enloe Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06436157
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- GENESIS
- Acronym
- GENESIS
- Status last verified
- Jan 2025
- First submitted
- 15 May 2024
- Last updated
- 31 Jan 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Kurian AW, Abrahamse P, Furgal A, Ward KC, Hamilton AS, Hodan R, Tocco R, Liu L, Berek JS, Hoang L, Yussuf A, Susswein L, Esplin ED, Slavin TP, Gomez SL, Hofer TP, Katz SJ. Germline Genetic Testing After Cancer Diagnosis. JAMA. 2023 Jul 3;330(1):43-51. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.9526.
PubMed 37276540Daly MB, Pal T, Maxwell KN, Churpek J, Kohlmann W, AlHilli Z, Arun B, Buys SS, Cheng H, Domchek SM, Friedman S, Giri V, Goggins M, Hagemann A, Hendrix A, Hutton ML, Karlan BY, Kassem N, Khan S, Khoury K, Kurian AW, Laronga C, Mak JS, Mansour J, McDonnell K, Menendez CS, Merajver SD, Norquist BS, Offit K, Rash D, Reiser G, Senter-Jamieson L, Shannon KM, Visvanathan K, Welborn J, Wick MJ, Wood M, Yurgelun MB, Dwyer MA, Darlow SD. NCCN Guidelines(R) Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2024. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023 Oct;21(10):1000-1010. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0051.
PubMed 37856201Kurian AW, Ward KC, Abrahamse P, Bondarenko I, Hamilton AS, Deapen D, Morrow M, Berek JS, Hofer TP, Katz SJ. Time Trends in Receipt of Germline Genetic Testing and Results for Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer or Ovarian Cancer, 2012-2019. J Clin Oncol. 2021 May 20;39(15):1631-1640. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.02785. Epub 2021 Feb 9.
PubMed 33560870Swink A, Nair A, Hoof P, Matthews A, Burden C, Johnson K, Blum JL. Barriers to the utilization of genetic testing and genetic counseling in patients with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2019 Jun 11;32(3):340-344. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2019.1612702. eCollection 2019 Jul.
PubMed 31384183McAllister KA, Schmitt ML. Impact of a nurse navigator on genomic testing and timely treatment decision making in patients with breast cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2015 Oct;19(5):510-2. doi: 10.1188/15.CJON.510-512.
PubMed 26414569Rives TA, Pavlik H, Li N, Qasrawi L, Yan D, Pickarski J, Dietrich CS, Miller RW, Ueland FR, Kolesar JM. Implementation of Nurse Navigation Improves Rate of Molecular Tumor Testing for Ovarian Cancer in a Gynecologic Oncology Practice. Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jun 15;15(12):3192. doi: 10.3390/cancers15123192.
PubMed 37370804DiBiase JF, Scharnetzki E, Edelman E, Lucas FL, Helbig P, Rueter J, Han PKJ, Ziller E, Jacobs EA, Anderson EC; MCGI Working Group. Urban-Rural and Socioeconomic Differences in Patient Knowledge and Perceptions of Genomic Tumor Testing. JCO Precis Oncol. 2023 Mar;7:e2200631. doi: 10.1200/PO.22.00631.
PubMed 36893376Anderson EC, Hinton AC, Lary CW, Fenton ATHR, Antov A, Edelman E, Helbig P, Reed K, Miesfeldt S, Thomas CA, Hall MJ, Roberts JS, Rueter J, Han PKJ; MCGI Working Group. Community oncologists' perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing. BMC Cancer. 2021 Nov 25;21(1):1273. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08985-0.
PubMed 34823486Idos GE, Kurian AW, Ricker C, Sturgeon D, Culver JO, Kingham KE, Koff R, Chun NM, Rowe-Teeter C, Lebensohn AP, Levonian P, Lowstuter K, Partynski K, Hong C, Mills MA, Petrovchich I, Ma CS, Hartman AR, Allen B, Wenstrup RJ, Lancaster JM, Brown K, Kidd J, Evans B, Mukherjee B, McDonnell KJ, Ladabaum U, Ford JM, Gruber SB. Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of the Diagnostic Yield and Patient Experience of Multiplex Gene Panel Testing For Hereditary Cancer Risk. JCO Precis Oncol. 2019 Mar 28;3:PO.18.00217. doi: 10.1200/PO.18.00217. eCollection 2019 Mar.
PubMed 34322651Samadder NJ, Riegert-Johnson D, Boardman L, Rhodes D, Wick M, Okuno S, Kunze KL, Golafshar M, Uson PLS Jr, Mountjoy L, Ertz-Archambault N, Patel N, Rodriguez EA, Lizaola-Mayo B, Lehrer M, Thorpe CS, Yu NY, Esplin ED, Nussbaum RL, Sharp RR, Azevedo C, Klint M, Hager M, Macklin-Mantia S, Bryce AH, Bekaii-Saab TS, Sekulic A, Stewart AK. Comparison of Universal Genetic Testing vs Guideline-Directed Targeted Testing for Patients With Hereditary Cancer Syndrome. JAMA Oncol. 2021 Feb 1;7(2):230-237. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6252.
PubMed 33126242Teresi JA, Yu X, Stewart AL, Hays RD. Guidelines for Designing and Evaluating Feasibility Pilot Studies. Med Care. 2022 Jan 1;60(1):95-103. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001664.
PubMed 34812790
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Jan 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Genetic Testing Uptake Through an Enhanced Oncology Nurse-Led Intervention in Patients With Solid Tumors (GENESIS): A Pilot Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06436157
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- GENESIS / GENESIS
- Conditions
- Solid Tumor, Adult
- Keywords
- Genetic Counseling and Testing, NCCN guidelines, Utilization, Feasibility, Nurse-led care coordination
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, DavisUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Enloe Regional Cancer Center
- Study start
- 26 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 26 Mar 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 26 Sep 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 May 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Genetic factors are a significant determinant of the likelihood of developing various types of cancers. Identification of germline risk can have important implications for both patients and their families. Although estimates vary, pathogenic germline variants can be seen in ~3-17.5% of unselected patients with cancer with important clinical significance. Unfortunately, despite progress in multigene testing and the identification of heritable conditions, genetic counseling and testing (GCT) remains underutilized among cancer patients. Although there are multiple barriers to low testing, initial referral to GCT from the treating oncologist has been noted to be the most significant barrier.
Nurse navigation has been shown to improve the timeliness of cancer care and patient outcomes across various cancer types and improve the uptake of genomic testing in cancer patients. Despite proven benefits, community cancer centers often face resource limitations that prevent them from consistently assigning a dedicated nurse navigator to cancer patients. However, community centers universally have oncology nurses who routinely educate patients about their systemic therapies. By enhancing the "therapy education" sessions, the investigators hypothesize that oncology nurses can bridge this gap and potentially identify eligible patients, provide essential education on the importance of genetic testing, and facilitate the referral process. The investigators propose a pilot randomized study to evaluate the potential effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of a novel, nurse-led "enhanced education" intervention specifically designed to increase the uptake of GCT in adult cancer patients.
Detailed description
Identification of germline risk can have important implications for both patients and their families: it can help patients develop tailored cancer surveillance, risk-reducing measures, reproductive planning, identify novel genotype-directed drug targets, and also optimally address the risk of malignancy in at-risk relatives. Although estimates vary, pathogenic germline variants (PGV) can be seen in ~3-17.5% of unselected patients with cancer with important clinical significance. Although national and international guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) outline the criteria for who should be offered genetic counseling and testing (GCT) based on a patient's personal and/or family history, recent studies have found that broader testing of at-risk patients might help identify PGV in patients who otherwise would not have met guidelines for genetic testing.
Unfortunately, despite progress in multigene testing and the identification of heritable conditions, GCT remains underutilized among cancer patients. A recent study revealed that the uptake of germline testing among cancer patients remains strikingly low; in California and Georgia, between 2013 and 2019, less than 7% of patients diagnosed with cancer underwent such testing. While a study indicates a promising recent increase in the use of germline testing among women diagnosed with breast and ovarian cancer from 2012 to 2019, there is still a significant gap in ensuring that all eligible patients are provided with GCT. Although there are multiple barriers to low testing, initial referral to GCT from the treating oncologist has been noted to be the most significant barrier.
Community cancer centers are crucial in providing accessible care to a large segment of the cancer patient population. However, community cancer centers often face various challenges with limited resources for specialized genetic services variability in community oncologists' practice patterns and perceptions in GCT, and potentially urban-rural variability in patient awareness and understanding of the potential impact of genetic testing on their care.
Nurse navigation has been shown to improve the timeliness of cancer care and patient outcomes across various cancer types, in addition to improving the uptake of genomic testing in cancer patients. Despite proven benefits, community cancer centers often face resource limitations that prevent them from consistently assigning a dedicated nurse navigator to cancer patients. However, community centers universally have oncology nurses who routinely educate patients about their systemic therapies. By enhancing the "therapy education" sessions, the investigators hypothesize that oncology nurses can bridge this gap and potentially identify eligible patients, provide essential education on the importance of genetic testing, and facilitate the referral process. This approach leverages the trust and communication between nurses and patients and the principle that informed patients are more likely to engage in their healthcare decisions to potentially overcome barriers to genetic testing uptake.
The investigators propose a pilot randomized study to evaluate the potential effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of a novel, nurse-led "enhanced education" intervention specifically designed to increase the uptake of GCT in adult cancer patients. Patients in the enhanced education arm will be scheduled for an enhanced therapy education session with a trained oncology nurse for patients starting or switching their systemic therapies. In addition to the education conducted as part of the usual care, the nurse will: 1) provide detailed education on GCT; and 2) if the patient is eligible and agreeable to GCT, order a referral to GCT (if not already ordered). Nurses will provide a "nudge" to the referral coordinators within a week of the education session to ensure the referral process is completed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This pilot study will randomize patients who are starting or switching their systemic therapies for solid cancers, eligible for GCT, and have not undergone prior genetic testing into two groups: "enhanced education intervention" and "usual care education".
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Enhanced Education Intervention | Experimental | Other: Enhanced educationPatients in the enhanced education intervention arm will be scheduled for a redesigned therapy education session with a trained oncology nurse. |
| Usual Care Education Arm | Active comparator | Other: Usual care educationPatients in this arm will receive the usual care education provided to cancer patients undergoing systemic therapy, which includes information on treatment options, side effects, and support services without targeted genetic testing education. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Adults (≥ 18 years)
- Diagnosed with a solid tumor cancer type that has established guidelines suggesting the utility of genetic testing in treatment (breast, ovarian, prostate, pancreatic, colon, Lynch syndrome-related cancers (colorectal, endometrial, gastric, ovarian, pancreatic, urothelial, brain (usually glioblastoma), biliary tract, small intestine), Li-Fraumeni syndrome tumor spectrum (e.g., soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, central nervous system tumors, breast cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma), etc.)
- Eligible for GCT based on the current NCCN guidelines
- Starting new systemic therapy or switching systemic therapy
- Eligible for GCT as per the current NCCN guidelines
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Prior GCT with test results available (if tested 2014 onwards)
- Patients scheduled for treatment education with Advanced Practice Provider (typically reserved for more complex regimens)
- Patients with cognitive impairments or severe psychological disorders that would limit their ability to understand the genetic counseling/testing information or give informed consent.
- Any other condition that would, in the investigator's judgment, contraindicate the patient's participation in the clinical study due to safety concerns with clinical study procedures (e.g., patients requiring urgent therapy and/or inpatient chemotherapy initiation).
- Patients who are currently participating in other clinical trials that could confound the outcomes of genetic testing uptake.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Enhanced educationIn addition to the education conducted as part of usual care, the nurse will: 1) provide basic education on GCT; and 2) if the patient is eligible and agreeable to GCT, place a referral to GCT (if not already ordered). Patients will also be provided with written materials reinforcing the key messages of GCT education, designed to be understandable to individuals without a medical background. Nurses will also conduct a follow-up "nudge" by sending an in basket message via electronic medical record to ensure that the referrals are processed by the referral coordinators. | Other | Enhanced Education Intervention |
| Usual care educationA brief introduction to GCT will be provided in accordance with the information covered in the "chemo education binder," which is the current standard of care at Enloe Regional Cancer Center. As per the usual care, referrals for genetic testing will be clinician-initiated without the proactive involvement of the RN. | Other | Usual Care Education Arm |
Primary outcome
Percentage of patients in each arm who proceed to GCT consultation following the intervention.
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
3 secondary outcomes
Percentage of patients in each arm referred to GCT
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Average time from GCT referral order to GCT consultation
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Average time from GCT consultation to completion of genetic testing
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 9 months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 Jan 2025.
- Background: PubMed 37276540Kurian AW, Abrahamse P, Furgal A, Ward KC, Hamilton AS, Hodan R, Tocco R, Liu L, Berek JS, Hoang L, Yussuf A, Susswein L, Esplin ED, Slavin TP, Gomez SL, Hofer TP, Katz SJ. Germline Genetic Testing After Cancer Diagnosis. JAMA. 2023 Jul 3;330(1):43-51. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.9526.
- Background: PubMed 37856201Daly MB, Pal T, Maxwell KN, Churpek J, Kohlmann W, AlHilli Z, Arun B, Buys SS, Cheng H, Domchek SM, Friedman S, Giri V, Goggins M, Hagemann A, Hendrix A, Hutton ML, Karlan BY, Kassem N, Khan S, Khoury K, Kurian AW, Laronga C, Mak JS, Mansour J, McDonnell K, Menendez CS, Merajver SD, Norquist BS, Offit K, Rash D, Reiser G, Senter-Jamieson L, Shannon KM, Visvanathan K, Welborn J, Wick MJ, Wood M, Yurgelun MB, Dwyer MA, Darlow SD. NCCN Guidelines(R) Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2024. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023 Oct;21(10):1000-1010. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0051.
- Background: PubMed 33560870Kurian AW, Ward KC, Abrahamse P, Bondarenko I, Hamilton AS, Deapen D, Morrow M, Berek JS, Hofer TP, Katz SJ. Time Trends in Receipt of Germline Genetic Testing and Results for Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer or Ovarian Cancer, 2012-2019. J Clin Oncol. 2021 May 20;39(15):1631-1640. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.02785. Epub 2021 Feb 9.
- Background: PubMed 31384183Swink A, Nair A, Hoof P, Matthews A, Burden C, Johnson K, Blum JL. Barriers to the utilization of genetic testing and genetic counseling in patients with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2019 Jun 11;32(3):340-344. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2019.1612702. eCollection 2019 Jul.
- Background: PubMed 26414569McAllister KA, Schmitt ML. Impact of a nurse navigator on genomic testing and timely treatment decision making in patients with breast cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2015 Oct;19(5):510-2. doi: 10.1188/15.CJON.510-512.
- Background: PubMed 37370804Rives TA, Pavlik H, Li N, Qasrawi L, Yan D, Pickarski J, Dietrich CS, Miller RW, Ueland FR, Kolesar JM. Implementation of Nurse Navigation Improves Rate of Molecular Tumor Testing for Ovarian Cancer in a Gynecologic Oncology Practice. Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jun 15;15(12):3192. doi: 10.3390/cancers15123192.
- Background: PubMed 36893376DiBiase JF, Scharnetzki E, Edelman E, Lucas FL, Helbig P, Rueter J, Han PKJ, Ziller E, Jacobs EA, Anderson EC; MCGI Working Group. Urban-Rural and Socioeconomic Differences in Patient Knowledge and Perceptions of Genomic Tumor Testing. JCO Precis Oncol. 2023 Mar;7:e2200631. doi: 10.1200/PO.22.00631.
- Background: PubMed 34823486Anderson EC, Hinton AC, Lary CW, Fenton ATHR, Antov A, Edelman E, Helbig P, Reed K, Miesfeldt S, Thomas CA, Hall MJ, Roberts JS, Rueter J, Han PKJ; MCGI Working Group. Community oncologists' perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing. BMC Cancer. 2021 Nov 25;21(1):1273. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08985-0.
- Background: PubMed 34322651Idos GE, Kurian AW, Ricker C, Sturgeon D, Culver JO, Kingham KE, Koff R, Chun NM, Rowe-Teeter C, Lebensohn AP, Levonian P, Lowstuter K, Partynski K, Hong C, Mills MA, Petrovchich I, Ma CS, Hartman AR, Allen B, Wenstrup RJ, Lancaster JM, Brown K, Kidd J, Evans B, Mukherjee B, McDonnell KJ, Ladabaum U, Ford JM, Gruber SB. Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of the Diagnostic Yield and Patient Experience of Multiplex Gene Panel Testing For Hereditary Cancer Risk. JCO Precis Oncol. 2019 Mar 28;3:PO.18.00217. doi: 10.1200/PO.18.00217. eCollection 2019 Mar.
- Background: PubMed 33126242Samadder NJ, Riegert-Johnson D, Boardman L, Rhodes D, Wick M, Okuno S, Kunze KL, Golafshar M, Uson PLS Jr, Mountjoy L, Ertz-Archambault N, Patel N, Rodriguez EA, Lizaola-Mayo B, Lehrer M, Thorpe CS, Yu NY, Esplin ED, Nussbaum RL, Sharp RR, Azevedo C, Klint M, Hager M, Macklin-Mantia S, Bryce AH, Bekaii-Saab TS, Sekulic A, Stewart AK. Comparison of Universal Genetic Testing vs Guideline-Directed Targeted Testing for Patients With Hereditary Cancer Syndrome. JAMA Oncol. 2021 Feb 1;7(2):230-237. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6252.
- Background: PubMed 34812790Teresi JA, Yu X, Stewart AL, Hays RD. Guidelines for Designing and Evaluating Feasibility Pilot Studies. Med Care. 2022 Jan 1;60(1):95-103. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001664.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Solid Tumor, Adult
Recruiting
An Exploratory Study to Evaluate Immune Determinants of the Response to Adoptive Cell Therapy (ACT) in Solid and Hematologic Tumors
Solid Tumor, Adult, Solid Tumor, Childhood
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
Advanced or Recurrent Solid Tumors Treated With SHetA2
Solid Tumor, Adult
RecruitingObservational study
NCI Childhood Cancer Data Initiative (CCDI) Led Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Rare Cancer Registry for Very Rare Solid Tumors
Very Rare Tumors, Very Rare Cancers
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study to Learn About the Study Medicine Called PF-08046876 in People With Advanced Solid Tumors
Advanced/Metastatic Solid Tumors, Bladder Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study With NKT3964 for Adults With Advanced/Metastatic Solid Tumors
Solid Tumor, Advanced Solid Tumor
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Ranjan Pathak, MD MHS principal investigator
Enloe Health
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Enhanced education in people with Solid Tumor, Adult, run by University of California, Davis at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Jan 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Rachel A Kitchen, CCRP (406-417-1576, rkitchen@ucdavis.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Percentage of patients in each arm who proceed to GCT consultation following the intervention. (time frame: Through study completion, an average of 9 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06436157, which also lists 11 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Jan 2025.