Introduction: Genomic tests can predict risk and tailor screening recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC). Primary care could be suitable for their widespread implementation. Objective: We aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of administering a CRC genomic test in primary care. Methods: Participants aged 45–74 years recruited from 4 Australian general practices were offered a genomic CRC risk test. Participants received brief verbal information about the test comprising 45 CRC-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms, before choosing whether to undertake the test. Personalized risks were given to testers. Uptake and knowledge of the genomic test, cancer-specific anxiety (Cancer Worry Scale), psychosocial impact (Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment [MICRA] score), and impact on CRC screening behaviour within 6 months were measured. Results: In 150 participants, test uptake was high (126, 84%), with 125 (83%) having good knowledge of the genomic test. Moderate risk participants were impacted more by the test (MICRA mean: 15.9) than average risk participants (mean: 9.5, difference in means: 6.4, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5, 11.2, p = 0.01), but all scores were low. Average risk participants’ cancer-specific anxiety decreased (mean differences from baseline: 1 month −0.5, 95% CI: −1.0, −0.1, p = 0.03; 6 months −0.6, 95% CI: −1.0, −0.2, p = 0.01). We found limited evidence for genomic testers being more likely to complete the risk-appropriate CRC screening than non-testers (41 vs. 17%, odds ratio = 3.4, 95% CI: 0.6, 34.8, p = 0.19), but some mediators of screening behaviour were altered in genomic testers. Conclusions: Genomic testing for CRC risk in primary care is acceptable and likely feasible. Further development of the risk assessment intervention could strengthen the impact on screening behaviour.

1.
Jenkins
MA
,
Ait Ouakrim
D
,
Boussioutas
A
,
Hopper
JL
,
Ee
HC
,
Emery
JD
, et al
Revised Australian national guidelines for colorectal cancer screening: family history
.
Med J Aust
.
2018
;
209
(
10
):
455
60
.
2.
Cairns
SR
,
Scholefield
JH
,
Steele
RJ
,
Dunlop
MG
,
Thomas
HJ
,
Evans
GD
, et al
Guidelines for colorectal cancer screening and surveillance in moderate and high risk groups (update from 2002)
.
Gut
.
2010
;
59
(
5
):
666
89
.
3.
Stoffel
EM
,
Mangu
PB
,
Gruber
SB
,
Hamilton
SR
,
Kalady
MF
,
Lau
MWY
, et al
Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement of the familial risk–colorectal cancer: European society for medical oncology clinical practice guidelines
.
J Clin Oncol
.
2015
;
33
(
2
):
209
.
4.
Sung
JJ
,
Ng
SC
,
Chan
FK
,
Chiu
HM
,
Kim
HS
,
Matsuda
T
, et al
An updated Asia Pacific Consensus Recommendations on colorectal cancer screening
.
Gut
.
2015
;
64
(
1
):
121
32
.
5.
Jenkins
MA
,
Win
AK
,
Dowty
JG
,
MacInnis
RJ
,
Makalic
E
,
Schmidt
DF
, et al
Ability of known susceptibility SNPs to predict colorectal cancer risk for persons with and without a family history
.
Fam Cancer
.
2019
;
18
(
4
):
389
97
.
6.
Jeon
J
,
Du
M
,
Schoen
RE
,
Hoffmeister
M
,
Newcomb
PA
,
Berndt
SI
, et al
Determining risk of colorectal cancer and starting age of screening based on lifestyle, environmental, and genetic factors
.
Gastroenterology
.
2018
;
154
(
8
):
2152
64 e19
.
7.
Frampton
MJ
,
Law
P
,
Litchfield
K
,
Morris
EJ
,
Kerr
D
,
Turnbull
C
, et al
Implications of polygenic risk for personalised colorectal cancer screening
.
Ann Oncol
.
2016
;
27
(
3
):
429
34
.
8.
Radice
P
,
Pharoah
PD
,
Peterlongo
P
.
Personalized testing based on polygenic risk score is promising for more efficient population-based screening programs for common oncological diseases
.
Ann Oncol
.
2016
;
27
(
3
):
369
70
.
9.
Geller
G
,
Botkin
JR
,
Green
MJ
,
Press
N
,
Biesecker
BB
,
Wilfond
B
, et al
Genetic testing for susceptibility to adult-onset cancer. The process and content of informed consent
.
JAMA
.
1997
;
277
(
18
):
1467
74
.
10.
Usher-Smith
JA
,
Silarova
B
,
Ward
A
,
Youell
J
,
Muir
KR
,
Campbell
J
, et al
Incorporating cancer risk information into general practice: a qualitative study using focus groups with health professionals
.
Br J Gen Pract
.
2017
;
67
(
656
):
e218
26
.
11.
Hayward
J
,
Bishop
M
,
Rafi
I
,
Davison
V
.
Genomics in routine clinical care: what does this mean for primary care?
Br J Gen Pract
.
2017
;
67
(
655
):
58
9
.
12.
Leventhal
K-G
,
Tuong
W
,
Peshkin
BN
,
Salehizadeh
Y
,
Fishman
MB
,
Eggly
S
, et al
“Is it really worth it to get tested?”: primary care patients’ impressions of predictive SNP testing for colon cancer
.
J Genet Couns
.
2013
;
22
(
1
):
138
51
.
13.
Graves
KD
,
Peshkin
BN
,
Luta
G
,
Tuong
W
,
Schwartz
MD
.
Interest in genetic testing for modest changes in breast cancer risk: implications for SNP testing
.
Public Health Genomics
.
2011
;
14
(
3
):
178
89
.
14.
Wong
XY
,
Groothuis-Oudshoorn
CG
,
Tan
CS
,
van Til
JA
,
Hartman
M
,
Chong
KJ
, et al
Women’s preferences, willingness-to-pay, and predicted uptake for single-nucleotide polymorphism gene testing to guide personalized breast cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment
.
Patient Prefer Adherence
.
2018
;
12
:
1837
52
.
15.
Sanderson
SC
,
O’Neill
SC
,
Bastian
L
,
Bepler
G
,
McBride
CM
.
What can interest tell us about uptake of genetic testing? Intention and behavior amongst smokers related to patients with lung cancer
.
Public Health Genomics
.
2010
;
13
(
2
):
116
24
.
16.
Graves
KD
,
Leventhal
KG
,
Nusbaum
R
,
Salehizadeh
Y
,
Hooker
GW
,
Peshkin
BN
, et al
Behavioral and psychosocial responses to genomic testing for colorectal cancer risk
.
Genomics
.
2013
;
102
(
2
):
123
30
.
17.
Nusbaum
R
,
Leventhal
KG
,
Hooker
GW
,
Peshkin
BN
,
Butrick
M
,
Salehizadeh
Y
, et al
Translational genomic research: protocol development and initial outcomes following SNP testing for colon cancer risk
.
Transl Behav Med
.
2013
;
3
(
1
):
17
29
.
18.
Turbitt
E
,
Biesecker
B
.
A primer in genomics for social and behavioral investigators
.
Transl Behav Med
.
2020
;
10
(
2
):
451
6
.
19.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
.
National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: monitoring report 2019
.
Canberra, Australia
:
AIHW
;
2019
.
20.
Benton
SC
,
Butler
P
,
Allen
K
,
Chesters
M
,
Rickard
S
,
Stanley
S
, et al
GP participation in increasing uptake in a national bowel cancer screening programme: the PEARL project
.
Br J Cancer
.
2017
;
116
(
12
):
1551
7
.
21.
Naber
SK
,
Kundu
S
,
Kuntz
KM
,
Dotson
WD
,
Williams
MS
,
Zauber
AG
, et al
Cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening based on polygenic risk: current status and future potential
.
JNCI Cancer Spectr
.
2019
;
4
(
1
):
pkz086
.
22.
Jenkins
MA
,
Makalic
E
,
Dowty
JG
,
Schmidt
DF
,
Dite
GS
,
MacInnis
RJ
, et al
Quantifying the utility of single nucleotide polymorphisms to guide colorectal cancer screening
.
Future Oncol
.
2016
;
12
(
4
):
503
13
.
23.
Taylor
DP
,
Burt
RW
,
Williams
MS
,
Haug
PJ
,
Cannon-Albright
LA
.
Population-based family history-specific risks for colorectal cancer: a constellation approach
.
Gastroenterology
.
2010
;
138
(
3
):
877
85
.
24.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
.
Australian Cancer Incidence and Mortality (ACIM) books: colorectal cancer
.
Canberra, Australia
:
AIHW
;
2016
.
25.
Cancer Council Australia Colorectal Cancer Guidelines Working Party
.
Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention, early detection and management of colorectal cancer
.
Sydney
:
Cancer Council Australia
;
2017
.
26.
Emery
JD
,
Pirotta
M
,
Macrae
F
,
Walker
JG
,
Qama
A
,
Boussioutas
A
, et al
‘Why don’t I need a colonoscopy?’: a novel approach to communicating risks and benefits of colorectal cancer screening
.
Aust J Gen Pract
.
2018
;
47
(
6
):
343
.
27.
Kim
GY
,
Walker
J
,
Bickerstaffe
A
,
Hewabandu
N
,
Pirotta
M
,
Flander
L
, et al
The CRISP-Q study: communicating the risks and benefits of colorectal cancer screening
.
Aust J Gen Pract
.
2018
;
47
(
3
):
139
45
.
28.
Wakefield
CE
,
Meiser
B
,
Homewood
J
,
Ward
R
,
O’Donnell
S
,
Kirk
J
, et al
Randomized trial of a decision aid for individuals considering genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer risk
.
Cancer
.
2008
;
113
(
5
):
956
65
.
29.
Bandaranayake
RC
.
Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37
.
Med Teach
.
2008
;
30
(
9–10
):
836
45
.
30.
Cella
D
,
Hughes
C
,
Peterman
A
,
Chang
CH
,
Peshkin
BN
,
Schwartz
MD
, et al
A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire
.
Health Psychol
.
2002
;
21
(
6
):
564
72
.
31.
Lerman
C
,
Trock
B
,
Rimer
BK
,
Boyce
A
,
Jepson
C
,
Engstrom
PF
.
Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms
.
Ann Intern Med
.
1991
;
114
(
8
):
657
61
.
32.
Vernon
SW
,
Myers
RE
,
Tilley
BC
.
Development and validation of an instrument to measure factors related to colorectal cancer screening adherence
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
.
1997
;
6
(
10
):
825
32
.
33.
Bruine de Bruin
W
,
Fischbeck
PS
,
Stiber
NA
,
Fischhoff
B
.
What number is “fifty–fifty”?: redistributing excessive 50% responses in elicited probabilities
.
Risk Anal
.
2002
;
22
(
4
):
713
23
.
34.
R Core Team
.
R: A language and environment for statistical computing
.
Vienna, Austria
:
R Foundation for Statistical Computing
;
2016
.
35.
Myers
RE
,
Weinberg
DS
,
Manne
SL
,
Sifri
R
,
Cocroft
J
,
Kash
K
, et al
Genetic and environmental risk assessment for colorectal cancer risk in primary care practice settings: a pilot study
.
Genet Med
.
2007
;
9
(
6
):
378
84
.
36.
Smit
AK
,
Espinoza
D
,
Newson
AJ
,
Morton
RL
,
Fenton
G
,
Freeman
L
, et al
A pilot randomized controlled trial of the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of giving information on personalized genomic risk of melanoma to the public
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
.
2017
;
26
(
2
):
212
21
.
37.
Australian Bureau of Statistics
.
Patient Experiences in Australia 2018–2019
.
Canberra, Australia
:
Australian Bureau of Statistics
;
2019
. Available from: http://stat.data.abs.gov.au/.
38.
Myers
RE
,
Ruth
K
,
Manne
SL
,
Cocroft
J
,
Sifri
R
,
Ziring
B
, et al
Effects of genetic and environmental risk assessment feedback on colorectal cancer screening adherence
.
J Behav Med
.
2015
;
38
(
5
):
777
86
.
39.
Bancroft
EK
,
Castro
E
,
Bancroft
GA
,
Ardern-Jones
A
,
Moynihan
C
,
Page
E
, et al
The psychological impact of undergoing genetic-risk profiling in men with a family history of prostate cancer
.
Psychooncology
.
2015
;
24
(
11
):
1492
9
.
40.
Smit
AK
,
Newson
AJ
,
Best
M
,
Badcock
CA
,
Butow
PN
,
Kirk
J
, et al
Distress, uncertainty, and positive experiences associated with receiving information on personal genomic risk of melanoma
.
Eur J Hum Genet
.
2018
;
26
(
8
):
1094
100
.
41.
Robinson
JO
,
Wynn
J
,
Biesecker
B
,
Biesecker
LG
,
Bernhardt
B
,
Brothers
KB
, et al
Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies
.
Genet Med
.
2019
;
21
(
12
):
2781
90
.
42.
French
DP
,
Southworth
J
,
Howell
A
,
Harvie
M
,
Stavrinos
P
,
Watterson
D
, et al
Psychological impact of providing women with personalised 10-year breast cancer risk estimates
.
Br J Cancer
.
2018
;
118
(
12
):
1648
57
.
43.
Dzau
VJ
,
Ginsburg
GS
,
Van Nuys
K
,
Agus
D
,
Goldman
D
.
Aligning incentives to fulfil the promise of personalised medicine
.
Lancet
.
2015
;
385
(
9982
):
2118
9
.
44.
Hollands
GJ
,
French
DP
,
Griffin
SJ
,
Prevost
AT
,
Sutton
S
,
King
S
, et al
The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis
.
BMJ
.
2016
;
352
:
i1102
.
45.
Weinberg
DS
,
Myers
RE
,
Keenan
E
,
Ruth
K
,
Sifri
R
,
Ziring
B
, et al
Genetic and environmental risk assessment and colorectal cancer screening in an average-risk population: a randomized trial
.
Ann Intern Med
.
2014
;
161
(
8
):
537
45
.
46.
Widen
E
,
Aro
J
,
Pollanen
P
,
Hotakainen
K
,
Partanen
J
,
Ripatti
S
.
Receiving personal genome-based disease risk information motivates individuals to take action to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD)
.
San Diego
:
American Society of Human Genetics
;
2018
.
47.
Subramanian
S
,
Bobashev
G
,
Morris
RJ
,
Hoover
S
.
Personalized medicine for prevention: can risk stratified screening decrease colorectal cancer mortality at an acceptable cost?
Cancer Causes Control
.
2017
;
28
(
4
):
299
308
.
48.
Horne
J
,
Madill
J
,
O’Connor
C
,
Shelley
J
,
Gilliland
J
.
A systematic review of genetic testing and lifestyle behaviour change: are we using high-quality genetic interventions and considering behaviour change theory?
Lifestyle Genomics
.
2018
;
11
(
1
):
49
63
.
49.
Chatterjee
N
,
Shi
J
,
Garcia-Closas
M
.
Developing and evaluating polygenic risk prediction models for stratified disease prevention
.
Nat Rev Genet
.
2016
;
17
(
7
):
392
406
.
50.
McBride
CM
,
Birmingham
WC
,
Kinney
AY
.
Health psychology and translational genomic research: bringing innovation to cancer-related behavioral interventions
.
Am Psychol
.
2015
;
70
(
2
):
91
104
.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.