Abstract
BACKGROUND: National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers (NCI-CCs) throughout the United States are mandated to translate state-of-the-art cancer research to communities and enhance clinical care for patients within their catchment areas. NCI-CCs play a vital role in national cancer initiatives focused on optimizing cancer care via personalized medicine in which improved risk assessment, screening, and genetic testing are foundational. In this era of targeted personalized care, although genetics has been incorporated into cancer centers, it is unknown how these innovations are being communicated to the public and communities served on cancer center websites. There is particularly limited knowledge surrounding how NCI-CCs publicly communicate their efforts to integrate patient-reported experiences with genomics to fulfill their overall mission and reduce the cancer burden in their catchment areas. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate how NCI-CCs publicly share information on their websites related to cancer center programming and activities to measure and incorporate patients' experiences with the use of genetics to guide cancer care. METHODS: For all NCI-CCs providing clinical care (N=65), we conducted a review of publicly available and published information and assessed five domains relevant to patients' experiences with genomic medicine: whether NCI-CCs (1) provided genetic testing, (2) directly expressed a goal of delivering personalized care, (3) provided pharmacogenomic testing, (4) assessed patient-reported experience measures with genomic medicine (including patient-reported outcomes [PROs] and other patient experience measures [OPEMs]), and (5) indicated an established infrastructure or set of resources to evaluate patient experience. We conducted a content analysis of the publicly available websites of NCI-CCs using the validated directed approach to content analysis. We quantified the results of our content analysis using count measures based on a binary (yes or no) coding scheme. RESULTS: While almost all the NCI-CCs (64/65, 98%) discussed providing personalized care and performing genetic testing on their websites, we found that 58% (38/65) indicated online that they assessed PROs or other patient experience measures with genomic medicine. Fewer centers (25/65, 38%) discussed on their websites having a mechanism for evaluating patients' experiences with genomic medicine that captured broader types of information beyond PROs, such as measures of patient education or care team communication. Finally, approximately 1 in 3 NCI-CCs (23/65, 35%) indicated having an established infrastructure with departmental resources dedicated to monitoring patients' experiences. These centers reflecting a built-in infrastructure were 8% to 12% more likely to publicly communicate targeted activities to assess patients' experiences with genomic medicine. CONCLUSIONS: With the burgeoning use of genomics in research and clinical care, comprehensive evaluation and incorporation of measures of patients' experiences with genomic medicine present a key opportunity to enhance cancer care at NCI-CCs.