Annie Turgeon | Search PubMed

PubMed2025

Psychological and emotional impacts of communicating breast cancer risk using multifactorial assessment with polygenic risk score: Findings from PERSPECTIVE I&I.

PURPOSE: To examine the psychological and emotional outcomes of personalized breast cancer risk communication up to 1 year after disclosure in a risk-stratified breast screening preimplementation study (Personalized Risk Assessment for Prevention and Early Detection of Breast Cancer: Integration and Implementation). METHODS: Among 3753 females aged 40 to 69, unaffected by breast cancer, with a prior mammogram, and who underwent multifactorial risk assessment to estimate their 10-year breast cancer risk, 2734 completed follow-up questionnaires up to 1 year after risk communication: 78.5% were at average risk, 16.5% at higher than average risk, and 5.0% at high risk. The impact of risk communication on breast cancer worry and psychological distress and factors associated with decisional regret were examined. RESULTS: Breast cancer worry and psychological distress scores remained low after risk communication and at 1 year follow-up. Up to 1 year after disclosure, small significant differences in breast cancer worry were observed between risk levels. Decisional regret was very low 1 year after risk communication. Lower levels of decisional regret were significantly associated with some factors, including higher satisfaction with the information received. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that personalized breast cancer risk communication has low negative psychological and emotional effects and highlights the importance of the information received for implementing this approach at population level.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Underrepresented populations in genomic research: a qualitative study of researchers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The lack of diversity in genomic data limits researchers' ability to investigate the relationships between genetic profiles, disease manifestations, and responses to new therapies. As a result, innovations in treatment could have potentially harmful effects on a significant portion of the population due to incomplete or inaccurate genomic data. In addition, the lack of harmonization in the use of population descriptors in genomic studies raises both ethical and scientific concerns regarding which descriptors should be used to study and recruit underrepresented populations. Therefore, understanding the factors contributing to the lack of diversity in genomic research is an urgent scientific, clinical, and public health priority. This study aims to explore the social and contextual factors influencing the participation of underrepresented populations in genomic research, from the perspective of researchers in the field. METHODS: A total of 13 semi-structured interviews were conducted with researchers experienced in genomic research in Canada and fluent in either French or English. The interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Researchers identified several factors contributing to the low participation of underrepresented populations in genomic research, with one key factor being the geographic distribution of research institutions and the disconnect between research efforts and the communities being studied. To address this issue, participants stressed the importance of moving away from colonial practices, such as conducting research on a community without consulting its members in the design phase. Furthermore, it was suggested that existing diversity, equity, and inclusion policies alone were insufficient to effectively address the challenge. Lastly, the study also highlighted a potential link between how study populations are categorized and the willingness of underrepresented groups to participate in genomic research. CONCLUSION: Although researchers are generally aware of the literature on the causes, consequences, and potential solutions for increasing participation, confusion remains regarding the use of population descriptors. Our findings highlight the need for improved education, greater consensus, and expanded dialogue within the genomic research community to promote the harmonization of population descriptors.

Humans↗