BMC Cancer (Nov 2021)

Community oncologists’ perceptions and utilization of large-panel genomic tumor testing

  • Eric C. Anderson,
  • Alexandra C. Hinton,
  • Christine W. Lary,
  • Anny T. H. R. Fenton,
  • Andrey Antov,
  • Emily Edelman,
  • Petra Helbig,
  • Kate Reed,
  • Susan Miesfeldt,
  • Christian A. Thomas,
  • Michael J. Hall,
  • J. Scott Roberts,
  • Jens Rueter,
  • Paul K. J. Han,
  • MCGI Working Group

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08985-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Purpose Large-panel genomic tumor testing (GTT) is an emerging technology with great promise but uncertain clinical value. Previous research has documented variability in academic oncologists’ perceptions and use of GTT, but little is known about community oncologists’ perceptions of GTT and how perceptions relate to clinicians' intentions to use GTT. Methods Community oncology physicians (N = 58) participating in a statewide initiative aimed at improving access to large-panel GTT completed surveys assessing their confidence in using GTT, attitudes regarding the value of GTT, perceptions of barriers to GTT implementation, and future intentions to use GTTs. Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to characterize these perceptions and to explore the relationships between them. Results There was substantial variability in clinicians’ perceptions of GTT. Clinicians generally had moderate confidence in their ability to use GTT, but lower confidence in patients’ ability to understand test results and access targeted treatment. Clinicians had positive attitudes regarding the value of GTT. Clinicians’ future intentions to use GTT were associated with greater confidence in using GTT and greater perceived barriers to implementing GTT, but not with attitudes about the value of GTT. Conclusions Community oncologists’ perceptions of large-panel genomic tumor testing are variable, and their future intentions to use GTT are associated with both their confidence in and perceived barriers to its use, but not with their attitudes towards GTT. More research is needed to understand other factors that determine how oncologists perceive and use GTT in clinical practice.

Keywords