Achieving equity in genomic testing for breast cancer through partner-led strategies and policies.

11027 Background: Genomic testing is recommended for individuals with estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer to determine the need for chemotherapy alongside endocrine therapy. However, access disparities persist by race, ethnicity, and income. This study aims to identify modifiable barriers and co-design policy recommendations for equitable genomic testing for low-income, and racial and ethnic minoritized people with breast cancer in Northern California. Methods: Using community-based participatory research and expert panel methods, we collaborated with an 18-member expert panel of patients, caregivers, oncology clinicians, community organizations, advocates, and policymakers to identify modifiable barriers and propose solutions. Phase 1 involved an 85-question survey and semi-structured interviews with patients, caregivers, clinicians, navigators, policymakers, and payers, administered by bilingual community health workers in Spanish, Tagalog, and Chinese, to assess genomic testing barriers and solutions. Phase 2 used Delphi consensus methods with the expert panel to finalize policy recommendations. Results: Of 912 invited, 831 participated in surveys (90% response rate), and all 30 purposively sampled individuals participated in interviews (100% response rate). Survey participants included 514 patients, 101 caregivers, 94 clinicians, 74 navigators, 25 policymakers, and 23 payers. Among patients, 102 (19.8%) were Asian, 132 (25.7%) Black, 138 (26.9%) Hispanic White, 28 (5.5%) Non-Hispanic White, and the remainder preferred not to answer. Racial and ethnic minoritized patients had significantly lower odds of genomic testing compared to Non-Hispanic Whites: Black patients 86% lower (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.31), Asian patients 71% lower (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.14-0.59), and Hispanic White patients 79% lower (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.11-0.43). Four themes emerged from interviews: 1) limited awareness/resources, 2) inequitable care, 3) financial/cultural barriers, and 4) insufficient social support. The expert panel reached consensus on policy recommendations, including mandating reflexive, fully reimbursed genomic testing (mean rating ± SD: 8.3 ± 0.9), eliminating prior authorization (8.2 ± 0.8), removing co-pays/out-of-pocket costs (8.1 ± 0.8), and providing educational materials in preferred languages with lay terminology (7.9 ± 1.2). Conclusions: Disparities in genomic testing persist, highlighting the need for targeted interventions. Policy recommendations co-designed with communities and other interested groups can be implemented to improve equitable care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.11027
Primary Topic
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Achieving equity in genomic testing for breast cancer through partner-led strategies and policies.

Emily Hayes Wood, Manali Indravadan Patel, Mary Obasi, Ysabel Durón et al.
1 links
Journal of Clinical Oncology
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
article

Achieving equity in genomic testing for breast cancer through partner-led strategies and policies.

Emily Hayes Wood, Manali Indravadan Patel, Mary Obasi, Ysabel Durón, Sacha Moufarrej, Mariana C. Stern, Sophia Akatue, Douglas W. Blayney, Scarlett Lin Gomez, Shannon E. Muir, Rafaay Kamran, Fátima Muñoz, Helen K. Chew, Kasandra Escobar, Lisa Tealer
article en

Abstract

11027 Background: Genomic testing is recommended for individuals with estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer to determine the need for chemotherapy alongside endocrine therapy. However, access disparities persist by race, ethnicity, and income. This study aims to identify modifiable barriers and co-design policy recommendations for equitable genomic testing for low-income, and racial and ethnic minoritized people with breast cancer in Northern California. Methods: Using community-based participatory research and expert panel methods, we collaborated with an 18-member expert panel of patients, caregivers, oncology clinicians, community organizations, advocates, and policymakers to identify modifiable barriers and propose solutions. Phase 1 involved an 85-question survey and semi-structured interviews with patients, caregivers, clinicians, navigators, policymakers, and payers, administered by bilingual community health workers in Spanish, Tagalog, and Chinese, to assess genomic testing barriers and solutions. Phase 2 used Delphi consensus methods with the expert panel to finalize policy recommendations. Results: Of 912 invited, 831 participated in surveys (90% response rate), and all 30 purposively sampled individuals participated in interviews (100% response rate). Survey participants included 514 patients, 101 caregivers, 94 clinicians, 74 navigators, 25 policymakers, and 23 payers. Among patients, 102 (19.8%) were Asian, 132 (25.7%) Black, 138 (26.9%) Hispanic White, 28 (5.5%) Non-Hispanic White, and the remainder preferred not to answer. Racial and ethnic minoritized patients had significantly lower odds of genomic testing compared to Non-Hispanic Whites: Black patients 86% lower (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.31), Asian patients 71% lower (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.14-0.59), and Hispanic White patients 79% lower (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.11-0.43). Four themes emerged from interviews: 1) limited awareness/resources, 2) inequitable care, 3) financial/cultural barriers, and 4) insufficient social support. The expert panel reached consensus on policy recommendations, including mandating reflexive, fully reimbursed genomic testing (mean rating ± SD: 8.3 ± 0.9), eliminating prior authorization (8.2 ± 0.8), removing co-pays/out-of-pocket costs (8.1 ± 0.8), and providing educational materials in preferred languages with lay terminology (7.9 ± 1.2). Conclusions: Disparities in genomic testing persist, highlighting the need for targeted interventions. Policy recommendations co-designed with communities and other interested groups can be implemented to improve equitable care.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(16_suppl)
University of Southern California (US), Meharry Medical College (US), Cancer Prevention Institute of California (US), University of California, San Francisco (US), University of California San Diego (US), Latino Health Institute (United States) (US), Bay Area Community Health Advisory Council (US), San Ysidro Health (US), Stanford Cancer Institute, University of California, Davis (US), Stanford University (US)
California Breast Cancer Research Program
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
BRCA gene mutations in cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.