Improving feasibility and timeliness of hereditary cancer risk assessment with a brief patient-administered digital tool and rapidly available telehealth genetic counseling.

Abstract

10614 Background: Multiple guidelines recommend hereditary cancer risk assessment for all adults, yet it rarely is performed. This is largely due to the time-consuming nature of such assessments and difficulty with access to genetic counseling for those at high risk. We designed a care model to address these issues that is suitable for both oncology and non-oncology settings. It includes a brief patient-administered and clinically validated digital hereditary cancer risk assessment tool, followed by immediate online self-scheduling features for telehealth genetic counseling, with appointments available within 48 hours. The digital tool uses a guideline-based algorithm to assess whether genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk is indicated. Here we aim to evaluate the effectiveness and timeliness of this model. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients that engaged with this model from May 2021 to August 2023 at 32 obstetrics and gynecology clinics. We also used nationwide data from the National Society of Genetic Counselor's (NSGC) Professional Status Survey. To assess timeliness of genetic counseling appointments in this care model, we compared the time from scheduling the appointment to the start of the appointment to wait times at health systems for comparable non-urgent cancer genetic counseling appointments, from the NSGC data. Effectiveness was assessed via rates of completion of the tool and scheduling of genetic counseling. Results: 2538 patients (98% female, mean age 37 years, 3.9% with a personal history of cancer) initiated the care model and 95% (2415/2538) completed the risk assessment tool. A quarter (26% (628/2415)) met criteria for germline genetic testing. The median time to complete the tool was 2.7 minutes (IQR 2.9). At the end of the tool, patients could click a button to schedule an appointment with a genetic counselor to discuss hereditary cancer risk and genetic testing. 44% (274/628) booked an appointment. The median time from scheduling to genetic counseling appointment was 2.8 days (IQR 4.9 days), which is shorter than the median wait time for comparable genetic counseling appointments at health systems in the nationwide NSGC dataset (21 days (IQR 53 days); p<< 0.01). Conclusions: The tool completion rate, rate of patients meeting criteria, and uptake of genetic counseling indicate the model is effective. Timeliness was improved by this model, with the digital tool assessing risk in ~3 minutes, compared to previous reports of ~30 minutes for manual hereditary cancer risk assessment. In addition, the timeliness of genetic counseling appointments was markedly better than the current standard of care. These findings suggest that this care model can support physicians in providing timely guideline-recommended hereditary cancer risk assessment to their patients.