Motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing: A systematic review

ObjectivesSingle-gene testing is associated with psycho-social challenges for cancer patients. Genomic testing may amplify these. The aim of this study was to understand patients’ motivations and barriers to pursue cancer genomic testing, to enable healthcare providers to support their patients throughout the testing process and interpretation of test results.MethodsFive databases were searched for original peer reviewed research articles published between January 2001 and September 2018 addressing motivation for genomic cancer testing. QualSyst was used to assess quality.Results182 studies were identified and 17 were included for review. Studies were heterogenous. Both somatic and germline testing were included, and 14 studies used hypothetical scenarios. 3249 participants were analyzed, aged 18 to 94. Most were female and white. The most common diagnoses were breast, ovarian, lung and colorectal cancer. Interest in testing was high. Motivations included ability to predict cancer risk, inform disease management, benefit families, and understand cancer. Barriers included concerns about cost, privacy/confidentiality, clinical utility, and psychological harm.ConclusionsDespite concerns, consumers are interested in cancer genomic testing if it can provide actionable results for themselves and their families.Practice ImplicationsProviders must manage understanding and expectations of testing and translate genetic information into health-promoting behaviours.     

Influence of Classroom-Level Factors on Implementation Fidelity During Scale-up of Evidence-Based Interventions

Prevention Science - As evidence-based interventions (EBIs) become more widely disseminated, fidelity of implementation (FOI) often wanes. This study explores the association between FOI and...     

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor and inflammation in depression: Pathogenic partners in crime?

Major depressive disorder is a debilitating disorder affecting millions of people each year. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and inflammation are two prominent biologic risk factors in the pathogenesis of depression that have received considerable attention. Many clinical and animal studies have highlighted associations between low levels of BDNF or high levels of inflammatory markers and the development of behavioral symptoms of depression. However, less is known about potential interaction between BDNF and inflammation, particularly within the central nervous system. Emerging evidence suggests that there is bidirectional regulation between these factors with important implications for the development of depressive symptoms and anti-depressant response. Elevated levels of inflammatory mediators have been shown to reduce expression of BDNF, and BDNF may play an important negative regulatory role on inflammation within the brain. Understanding this interaction more fully within the context of neuropsychiatric disease is important for both developing a fuller understanding of biological pathogenesis of depression and for identifying novel therapeutic opportunities. Here we review these two prominent risk factors for depression with a particular focus on pathogenic implications of their interaction.     

Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors on FOLFOX and CapeOx Regimens in Colorectal Cancer

Background

First-line adjuvant chemotherapy options for early-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) include CapeOx (capecitabine, intravenous oxaliplatin) and FOLFOX (intravenous 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin). Capecitabine is an oral prodrug analog of 5-fluorouracil, and recent studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may detrimentally affect capecitabine efficacy. Conversely, some literature suggests that PPIs may negatively affect CRC itself. To gain insight into the nature of PPIs’ effect on capecitabine and CRC, we investigated their effects on effectiveness of CapeOx versus FOLFOX chemotherapy.