AzTrials
AzTrials

Hereditary Breast and Ovarian CancerNCT03511690

Testing an Intelligent Tutoring System to Enhance Genetic Risk Assessment

A study testing BRCA-Gist in people with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, run by Georgetown University at 4 sites in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Participating in genetic cancer risk assessments (GCRA) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer can inform treatment and risk management decisions and improve breast cancer outcomes. However, Latina and Black women underuse GCRA services, which may increase breast cancer disparities. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer
What is being tested?
BRCA-Gist
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
95 participants
Where
4 sitesUnited States
Study dates
1 Jul 2017to 20 Feb 2022
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • Women only
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Self-identify as Black and/or Latina
  • English proficiency
  • Be 18 years old or older
  • Be able to provide informed consent
  • Be at risk of carrying HBOC mutation using personal/family cancer histories based on the NCCN guidelines

Who cannot join

  • Prior participation in genetic counseling or genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk.

Trial locations and contacts

4 sites in 1 country.

United States4 sites

  • Nueva Vida

    Alexandria, Virginia, 22314

  • Virginia Commonwealth University

    Richmond, Virginia, 23284

  • Capital Breast Care Center

    Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20003

  • Georgetown University

    Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20007

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Testing an Intelligent Tutoring System Intervention to Enhance Genetic Risk Assessment in Underserved Blacks and Latinas at Risk of Hereditary Breast Cancer

Participating in genetic cancer risk assessments (GCRA) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer can inform treatment and risk management decisions and improve breast cancer outcomes. However, Latina and Black women underuse GCRA services, which may increase breast cancer disparities. This study will adapt and test the impact of an easily scalable novel Tutoring System intervention to enhance GCRA use and improve psychosocial outcomes in a clinical sample of underserved Latina and Black women at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Read the detailed description

Specific Aims BRCA1/2 mutations are the most commonly identified Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) mutations. Women with these mutations have a 50-80% lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Breast cancer survivors with a BRCA1/2 mutation are at a higher risk of developing contralateral breast cancer than survivors without mutations. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends referral for HBOC genetic cancer risk assessments (genetic counseling and consideration of genetic testing for a single gene or panel testing; GCRA) for women at high risk for carrying a mutation. Obtaining a positive test can inform treatment in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients and management in survivors and unaffected women. Unfortunately, Latina and Black women have lower GCRA use than non-Latina Whites. Reasons for lower GCRA use include access and psychosocial factors (e.g. low knowledge, medical mistrust, low health literacy, anticipated negative emotions). There have been few GCRA interventions in ethnic minorities; two recent efforts largely focused on improving access, awareness, and knowledge with mixed success of impacting uptake. Theoretically guided interventions that support GCRA uptake in underserved populations are needed. Intervention development is particularly important given the growing complexity of multiplex gene testing and the potential to identify founder mutations or large rearrangements that are more prevalent in specific ethnic groups.

Our preliminary data with at-risk Black and Latina women suggests that improving access does not necessarily translate into higher GCRA uptake and that providers face challenges in communicating HBOC risk information. Patients have difficulty understanding HBOC numerical risk information, especially populations with low health literacy. Additionally, many existing educational tools were not theoretically derived, tend to prioritize quantitative risk communication, and do not often consider emotional aspects, despite evidence that emotions influence risk perceptions. Fuzzy Trace Theory posits that rather than relying on factual knowledge and quantitative risk comprehension, people construct gist representations that are anchored on culture and capture the essential bottom-line meaning of risk information, including the emotional experience. Informed by Fuzzy Trace Theory, BRCA-gist is an innovative Intelligent Tutoring System intervention that uses avatars to emulate tailored one-to-one human tutoring and includes the bottom-line meaning of risk messages. The preliminary efficacy of BRCA-gist was established in an experimental laboratory setting with mostly non-Hispanic White college students. Adapting BRCA-gist for a clinical sample of ethnically/racially diverse women at increased risk of carrying a mutation is important. Thus, BRCA-gist constitutes a scalable, inexpensive intervention with promising translational applications and potential to reduce disparities.

The goal of this mixed methods study is to adapt BRCA-gist and test the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of this innovative intervention in a sample of Black and Latina women at risk of HBOC (based on NCCN criteria using personal and family history of cancer). Using the Learner Verification and Revision framework, in Aim 1 we will gather input from site staff and community providers (n=10) about adaptations for implementation in clinical settings and from at-risk Latina and Black women (n=20) about cultural adaptations. In Aim 2 we will test the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of the adapted BRCA-gist on uptake of GCRA services. We will recruit 50 women nationally. After completing a brief baseline survey, we will randomize participants to an immediate intervention arm or a delayed arm. Women will complete a baseline survey and a two-week follow up survey. Primary outcomes include change in knowledge, attitudes, and intention about GCRA from baseline to follow-up

Aim 1: Adapt BRCA-gist. Providers and at-risk Black and Latina women will do the BRCA-gist intervention and provide feedback and suggestions to make cultural adaptations to implement BRCA-gist in community/clinic settings.

Aim 2: Test the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of BRCA-gist intervention in a delayed intervention trial.

H.2.1. We expect high overall retention (≥75%). H.2.2. We expect high satisfaction among women in the BRCA-gist arm (≥75%). H.2.3. Participants will have a greater increase in knowledge, gist comprehension, and intentions to use GCRA after attending to BRCA-Gist compared to the delayed arm.

H.2.4. Participants will have a higher uptake of GCRA services 2 weeks after they attend to BRCA-Gist compared to the delayed arm.

This project builds on our interdisciplinary teams' expertise in using innovative technologies to improve risk communication, disparities, translational genomics, cancer control interventions, and emotions. If successful, BRCA-gist can be tested in larger samples and could easily be disseminated into clinical settings and community clinics that serve underserved populations at increased risk for cancer.

Being tested
BRCA-Gist
Keywords
Latinas, African Americans
Medical subject headings
Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • BRCA-GistBehavioural

    BRCA-gist is an innovative Intelligent Tutoring System intervention that uses avatars to emulate tailored one-to-one human tutoring and includes the bottom-line meaning of risk messages. BRCA-gist is designed to provide the same information contained in four modules from the NCI webpages: "breast cancer and metastasis," "risk factors," "genetic mutation testing," and "the consequences of testing.

Study groups in NCT03511690
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Immediate BRCA-Gist InterventionExperimentalParticipants randomized to immediate BRCA-gist will complete the adapted intervention and immediately complete a baseline survey. They will be asked to complete a second survey two weeks after completion of the first one. BRCA-gist is a web-based tutoring system that emulates one-to-one human tutoring via avatars to communicate risk of BRCA1/2. We estimate a completion time of 90 minutes.
Receives: Behavioral: BRCA-Gist
Delayed BRCA-Gist InterventionExperimentalParticipants randomized to delayed BRCA-gist will initially complete a baseline survey. Two weeks after completion of that survey, they will complete the adapted intervention and immediately complete a second survey.
Receives: Behavioral: BRCA-Gist

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Breast Cancer Genetics Knowledge

    Breast cancer genetics knowledge will be assessed with 13-items from Erblich and colleagues' scale where participants evaluate whether statements about breast cancer genetics are true or false. The numbers of correct responses are added to create a score ranging from 0-13. Higher scores mean higher breast cancer genetics knowledge.

    Measured: Aim 2. From baseline to two week after the baseline.

  2. Intentions to participate in genetic counseling

    Intentions to participate in genetic councSussner, Jandorf, Thompson, and Valdimarsdottir, 2010)

    Measured: Aim 2. From baseline to two week after the baseline.

  3. Perceived pros and cons of genetic counseling and testing

    Perceived pros and cons of genetic counseling and testing will be measured with a13-item 5-response Likert-type scale from Thompson and colleagues (2000) where participants rate their degree of agreement with statements about the potential benefits (7 items) and concerns of undergoing GCT (5 items). The cons items are reverse coded. Items are summed. Higher score means higher perceived positive attitudes. Scores range from 13-65.

    Measured: Aim 2. From baseline to two week after the baseline.

Secondary outcomes (7)

  1. Uptake of Genetic Counseling

    Scale

    Measured: Two weeks after the intervention

  2. Self-efficacy about participating in genetic counseling

    Self-efficacy about participating in genetic counseling will be measured with the Genetic Testing and Counseling Self-efficacy Scale (Hendy, Lyons, Breakwell, 2006). The scale includes 3 items on a 5-point Likert-type response scale ranging from "completely agree" to "completely disagree." Items are summed. Scores range from 3-15. Higher scores indicate higher self-efficacy in participating in counseling and testing.

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention and within one hour post-intervention

  3. Emotions about developing breast cancer and about participating in genetic counseling

    Emotion about participating in genetic counseling will be assessed with Andersen's (2003) 5 item scale that captures scale to assess individuals' worry about developing breast cancer and with Caballero's (2007) scale scale to measure anticipatory emotions (how participants feel right now about participating in GCRA services in the future). Participants will report whether they feel positive (e.g. relief) and negative anticipatory emotions (e.g. worry) (Yes/No) and the level of intensity on a 7-point Likert-scale

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention and within one hour post-intervention

  4. Health Literacy and Numeracy

    General health literacy and numeracy with the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) short version that includes four numeracy items and two prose passages (Baker et al., 1999).

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention

  5. Mistrust about the medical system

    Mistrust about the medical system will be measured with the 7-item Medical Mistrust Index (Laveist et al., 2009)

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention

  6. Declarative Knowledge of Breast Cancer, Genetic Testing, and Genetic Risk

    Declarative Knowledge of Breast Cancer, Genetic Testing, and Genetic Risk - This scale developed by Wolfe and colleagues (2014) includes 52 four-alternative multiple-choice items about knowledge about breast cancer, genetic risk, and genetic testing. The percentage of correct answers are calculated. Higher percentages mean higher knowledge

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention and within one hour post-intervention

  7. Gist Comprehension of Genetic Cancer Risk

    Gist Comprehension of Genetic Cancer Risk (30 items). We will measure Gist Comprehension of Genetic Cancer Risk with a scale developed by Wolfe et al (2014). This 30-item Likert-type scale assesses gist comprehension of key information on breast cancer and genetic testing. The scale ranges from 1-7 (ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree with correct responses). Responses are averaged. Higher scores indicate higher gist comprehension.

    Measured: within one hour before the intervention and within one hour post-intervention

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted30 Apr 2018
  2. Study start1 Jul 2017
  3. Primary completion20 Feb 2022
  4. Study completion20 Feb 2022

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Screening
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Participants are randomized to an immediate or delayed arm
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
95 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03511690
Sponsor's protocol ID
1R21NR016905-01A1
Status last verified
Apr 2022
First submitted
16 Apr 2018
Last updated
25 Apr 2022
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Publications

  • Easton DF. How many more breast cancer predisposition genes are there? Breast Cancer Res. 1999;1(1):14-7. doi: 10.1186/bcr6. Epub 1999 Aug 23. No abstract available.

    PubMed 11250676

  • Chen S, Parmigiani G. Meta-analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 penetrance. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr 10;25(11):1329-33. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.1066.

    PubMed 17416853

  • Malone KE, Begg CB, Haile RW, Borg A, Concannon P, Tellhed L, Xue S, Teraoka S, Bernstein L, Capanu M, Reiner AS, Riedel ER, Thomas DC, Mellemkjaer L, Lynch CF, Boice JD Jr, Anton-Culver H, Bernstein JL. Population-based study of the risk of second primary contralateral breast cancer associated with carrying a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. J Clin Oncol. 2010 May 10;28(14):2404-10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.24.2495. Epub 2010 Apr 5.

    PubMed 20368571

  • Kauff ND, Satagopan JM, Robson ME, Scheuer L, Hensley M, Hudis CA, Ellis NA, Boyd J, Borgen PI, Barakat RR, Norton L, Castiel M, Nafa K, Offit K. Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med. 2002 May 23;346(21):1609-15. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa020119. Epub 2002 May 20.

    PubMed 12023992

  • Levy DE, Byfield SD, Comstock CB, Garber JE, Syngal S, Crown WH, Shields AE. Underutilization of BRCA1/2 testing to guide breast cancer treatment: black and Hispanic women particularly at risk. Genet Med. 2011 Apr;13(4):349-55. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182091ba4.

    PubMed 21358336

  • Glenn BA, Chawla N, Bastani R. Barriers to genetic testing for breast cancer risk among ethnic minority women: an exploratory study. Ethn Dis. 2012 Summer;22(3):267-73.

    PubMed 22870568

  • Sussner KM, Jandorf L, Thompson HS, Valdimarsdottir HB. Barriers and facilitators to BRCA genetic counseling among at-risk Latinas in New York City. Psychooncology. 2013 Jul;22(7):1594-604. doi: 10.1002/pon.3187. Epub 2012 Sep 16.

    PubMed 22987526

  • Sussner KM, Edwards T, Villagra C, Rodriguez MC, Thompson HS, Jandorf L, Valdimarsdottir HB. BRCA genetic counseling among at-risk Latinas in New York City: new beliefs shape new generation. J Genet Couns. 2015 Feb;24(1):134-48. doi: 10.1007/s10897-014-9746-z. Epub 2014 Aug 15.

    PubMed 25120034

  • Thompson HS, Valdimarsdottir HB, Jandorf L, Redd W. Perceived disadvantages and concerns about abuses of genetic testing for cancer risk: differences across African American, Latina and Caucasian women. Patient Educ Couns. 2003 Nov;51(3):217-27. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00219-7.

    PubMed 14630378

  • Armstrong K, Micco E, Carney A, Stopfer J, Putt M. Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. JAMA. 2005 Apr 13;293(14):1729-36. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.14.1729.

    PubMed 15827311

  • Mays D, Sharff ME, DeMarco TA, Williams B, Beck B, Sheppard VB, Peshkin BN, Eng-Wong J, Tercyak KP. Outcomes of a systems-level intervention offering breast cancer risk assessments to low-income underserved women. Fam Cancer. 2012 Sep;11(3):493-502. doi: 10.1007/s10689-012-9541-7.

    PubMed 22711611

  • Ricker C, Lagos V, Feldman N, Hiyama S, Fuentes S, Kumar V, Gonzalez K, Palomares M, Blazer K, Lowstuter K, MacDonald D, Weitzel J. If we build it ... will they come?--establishing a cancer genetics services clinic for an underserved predominantly Latina cohort. J Genet Couns. 2006 Dec;15(6):505-14. doi: 10.1007/s10897-006-9052-5.

    PubMed 17106633

  • Hall MJ, Olopade OI. Disparities in genetic testing: thinking outside the BRCA box. J Clin Oncol. 2006 May 10;24(14):2197-203. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.05.5889.

    PubMed 16682739

  • Weitzel JN, Clague J, Martir-Negron A, Ogaz R, Herzog J, Ricker C, Jungbluth C, Cina C, Duncan P, Unzeitig G, Saldivar JS, Beattie M, Feldman N, Sand S, Port D, Barragan DI, John EM, Neuhausen SL, Larson GP. Prevalence and type of BRCA mutations in Hispanics undergoing genetic cancer risk assessment in the southwestern United States: a report from the Clinical Cancer Genetics Community Research Network. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 10;31(2):210-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.0027. Epub 2012 Dec 10.

    PubMed 23233716

  • Graves KD, Christopher J, Harrison TM, Peshkin BN, Isaacs C, Sheppard VB. Providers' perceptions and practices regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing in African American women. J Genet Couns. 2011 Dec;20(6):674-89. doi: 10.1007/s10897-011-9396-3. Epub 2011 Aug 6.

    PubMed 21822773

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing BRCA-Gist in people with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, run by Georgetown University at 4 sites in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Apr 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 4 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Breast Cancer Genetics Knowledge (time frame: Aim 2. From baseline to two week after the baseline.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03511690, which also lists 24 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Apr 2022.

AzTrials uses cookies for analytics and advertising. You can accept or reject them; the site works either way. Privacy Policy.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in