Deborah J MacDonald

City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California, United States

Are you Deborah J MacDonald?

Claim your profile

Publications (38)306.18 Total impact

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aims of the present study were to describe cancer causes and risk perception, and to associate behaviors adopted for the prevention of tumors and cancer family history in individuals with suspect of hereditary cancer syndromes. A convenience sample of 51 individuals was selected from an oncogenetic counseling outpatient clinic in a university hospital in the countryside of the state of São Paulo. An instrument adapted to Brazilian culture was used. The respondents considered their own risk as being the same as the population's risk, and family history was not statistically associated with the performing of preventive exams. These findings highlight the need for intervention by health professionals, especially nurses, who may conduct health education activities for this population, which is an essential component of nursing care in oncogenetics.
    Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P 04/2013; 47(2):377-384. · 0.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The article aims to introduce nurses to how genetics-genomics is currently integrated into cancer care from prevention to treatment and influencing oncology nursing practice. Organizing Construct: An overview of genetics-genomics is described as it relates to cancer etiology, hereditary cancer syndromes, epigenetics factors, and management of care considerations. Methods: Peer-reviewed literature and expert professional guidelines were reviewed to address concepts of genetics-genomics in cancer care. Findings: Cancer is now known to be heterogeneous at the molecular level, with genetic and genomic factors underlying the etiology of all cancers. Understanding how these factors contribute to the development and treatment of both sporadic and hereditary cancers is important in cancer risk assessment, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and long-term management and surveillance. Conclusions: Rapidly developing advances in genetics-genomics are changing all aspects of cancer care, with implications for nursing practice. Clinical Relevance: Nurses can educate cancer patients and their families about genetic-genomic advances and advocate for use of evidence-based genetic-genomic practice guidelines to reduce cancer risk and improve outcomes in cancer management.
    Journal of Nursing Scholarship 01/2013; · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 07/2012; · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A patient/family-centered conference was conducted at an underserved community hospital to address Latinas' post-genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) medical information and psychosocial support needs, and determine the utility of the action research format. Latinas seen for GCRA were recruited to a half-day conference conducted in Spanish. Content was partly determined from follow-up survey feedback. Written surveys, interactive discussions, and Audience Response System (ARS) queries facilitated the participant-healthcare professional action research process. Analyses included descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. The 71 attendees (41 patients and 27 relatives/friends) were primarily non-US born Spanish-speaking females, mean age 43 years. Among patients, 73 % had a breast cancer history; 85 % had BRCA testing (49 % BRCA+). Nearly all (96 %) attendees completed the conference surveys and ARS queries; ≥48 % participated in interactive discussions. Most (95 %) agreed that the format met their personal interests and expectations and provided useful information and resources. Gaps/challenges identified in the GCRA process included pre-consult anxiety, uncertainty about reason for referral and expected outcomes, and psychosocial needs post-GCRA, such as absorbing and disseminating risk information to relatives and concurrently coping with a recent cancer diagnosis. The combined action research and educational conference format was innovative and effective for responding to continued patient information needs and addressing an important data gap about support needs of Latina patients and family members following genetic cancer risk assessment. Findings informed GCRA process improvements and provide a basis for theory-driven cancer control research.
    Familial Cancer 06/2012; · 1.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper describes the use of action research in a patient conference to provide updated hereditary cancer information, explore patient and family member needs and experiences related to genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA), elicit feedback on how to improve the GCRA process, and inform future research efforts. Invitees completed GCRA at City of Hope or collaborating facilities and had a BRCA mutation or a strong personal or family history of breast cancer. Action research activities were facilitated by surveys, round table discussions, and reflection time to engage participants, faculty, and researchers in multiple cycles of reciprocal feedback. The multimodal action research design effectively engaged conference participants to share their experiences, needs, and ideas for improvements to the GCRA process. Participants indicated that they highly valued the information and resources provided and desired similar future conferences. The use of action research in a patient conference is an innovative and effective approach to provide health education, elicit experiences, identify and help address needs of high-risk patients and their family members, and generate research hypotheses. Insights gained yielded valuable feedback to inform clinical care, future health services research, and continuing medical education activities. These methods may also be effective in other practice settings.
    Journal of Cancer Education 05/2012; 27(3):467-77. · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 protein expression and microsatellite instability (MSI) are well-established tools to screen for Lynch syndrome (LS). Although many cancer centers have adopted these tools as reflex LS screening after a colorectal cancer diagnosis, the standard of care has not been established, and no formal studies have described this practice in the United States. The purpose of this study was to describe prevalent practices regarding IHC/MSI reflex testing for LS in the United States and the subsequent follow-up of abnormal results. A 12-item survey was developed after interdisciplinary expert input. A letter of invitation, survey, and online-survey option were sent to a contact at each cancer program. A modified Dillman strategy was used to maximize the response rate. The sample included 39 National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (NCI-CCCs), 50 randomly selected American College of Surgeons-accredited Community Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Programs (COMPs), and 50 Community Hospital Cancer Programs (CHCPs). The overall response rate was 50%. Seventy-one percent of NCI-CCCs, 36% of COMPs, and 15% of CHCPs were conducting reflex IHC/MSI for LS; 48% of the programs used IHC, 14% of the programs used MSI, and 38% of the programs used both IHC and MSI. One program used a presurgical information packet, four programs offered an opt-out option, and none of the programs required written consent. Although most NCI-CCCs use reflex IHC/MSI to screen for LS, this practice is not well-adopted by community hospitals. These findings may indicate an emerging standard of care and diffusion from NCI-CCC to community cancer programs. Our findings also described an important trend away from requiring written patient consent for screening.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 02/2012; 30(10):1058-63. · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Scientific and technologic advances are revolutionizing our approach to genetic cancer risk assessment, cancer screening and prevention, and targeted therapy, fulfilling the promise of personalized medicine. In this monograph, we review the evolution of scientific discovery in cancer genetics and genomics, and describe current approaches, benefits, and barriers to the translation of this information to the practice of preventive medicine. Summaries of known hereditary cancer syndromes and highly penetrant genes are provided and contrasted with recently discovered genomic variants associated with modest increases in cancer risk. We describe the scope of knowledge, tools, and expertise required for the translation of complex genetic and genomic test information into clinical practice. The challenges of genomic counseling include the need for genetics and genomics professional education and multidisciplinary team training, the need for evidence-based information regarding the clinical utility of testing for genomic variants, the potential dangers posed by premature marketing of first-generation genomic profiles, and the need for new clinical models to improve access to and responsible communication of complex disease risk information. We conclude that given the experiences and lessons learned in the genetics era, the multidisciplinary model of genetic cancer risk assessment and management will serve as a solid foundation to support the integration of personalized genomic information into the practice of cancer medicine. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.
    CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 08/2011; · 153.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Seminars in Oncology 08/2011; 38(4):469-80. · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the impact of a multimodal interdisciplinary course on genetic cancer risk assessment and research collaboration for community-based clinicians. Clinicians are increasingly requested to conduct genetic cancer risk assessment, but many are inadequately prepared to provide these services. A prospective analysis of 131 participants (48 physicians, 41 advanced-practice nurses, and 42 genetic counselors) from community settings across the United States. The course was delivered in three phases: distance didactic learning, face-to-face training, and 12 months of web-based professional development activities to support integration of skills into practice. Cancer genetics knowledge, skills, professional self-efficacy, and practice changes were measured at baseline, immediate, and 14 months postcourse. Knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy scores were significantly different between practice disciplines; however, postscores increased significantly overall and for each discipline (P < 0.001). Fourteen-month practice outcomes reflect significant increases in provision of genetic cancer risk assessment services (P = 0.018), dissemination of cancer prevention information (P = 0.005) and high-risk screening recommendations (P = 0.004) to patients, patient enrollment in research (P = 0.013), and educational outreach about genetic cancer risk assessment (P = 0.003). Results support the efficacy of the multimodal course as a tool to develop a genetically literate workforce. Sustained alumni participation in web-based professional development activities has evolved into a distance-mediated community of practice in clinical cancer genetics, modeling the lifelong learning goals envisioned by leading continuing medical education stakeholders.
    Genetics in medicine: official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 05/2011; 13(9):832-40. · 3.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Health literacy and numeracy are necessary to understand health information and to make informed medical decisions. This study explored the relationships among health literacy, numeracy, and ability to accurately interpret graphical representations of breast cancer risk. Participants (N=120) were recruited from the Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered (FORCE) membership. Health literacy and numeracy were assessed. Participants interpreted graphs depicting breast cancer risk, made hypothetical treatment decisions, and rated preference of graphs. Most participants were Caucasian (98%) and had completed at least one year of college (93%). Fifty-two percent had breast cancer, 86% had a family history of breast cancer, and 57% had a deleterious BRCA gene mutation. Mean health literacy score was 65/66; mean numeracy score was 4/6; and mean graphicacy score was 9/12. Education and numeracy were significantly associated with accurate graph interpretation (r=0.42, p<0.001 and r=0.65, p<0.001, respectively). However, after adjusting for numeracy in multivariate linear regression, education added little to the prediction of graphicacy (r(2)=0.41 versus 0.42, respectively). In our highly health-literate population, numeracy was predictive of graphicacy. Effective risk communication strategies should consider the impact of numeracy on graphicacy and patient understanding.
    Patient Education and Counseling 04/2011; 83(1):92-8. · 2.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BRCA+ breast cancer patients face high risk for a second breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Helping these women decide among risk-reducing options requires effectively conveying complex, emotionally-laden, information. To support their decision-making needs, we developed a web-based decision aid (DA) as an adjunct to genetic counseling. Phase 1 used focus groups to determine decision-making needs. These findings and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework guided the DA development. Phase 2 involved nine focus groups of four stakeholder types (BRCA+ breast cancer patients, breast cancer advocates, and genetics and oncology professionals) to evaluate the DA's decision-making utility, information content, visual display, and implementation. Overall, feedback was very favorable about the DA, especially a values and preferences ranking-exercise and an output page displaying personalized responses. Stakeholders were divided as to whether the DA should be offered at-home versus only in a clinical setting. This well-received DA will be further tested to determine accessibility and effectiveness.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 03/2011; 20(3):294-307. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Deborah J MacDonald
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To provide an overview of hereditary cancer susceptibility genes and associated cancer risks. Peer reviewed published research studies and review articles. Identifying deleterious mutations in cancer susceptibility genes allows for clarification of cancer risk in individual family members and risk-level appropriate screening, and risk management recommendations. Evolving knowledge of the role of germline mutations provides an unprecedented opportunity to reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and morality. To provide individuals/families with accurate cancer risk management information and guidance, oncology nurses must be familiar with scientific discoveries related to cancer susceptibility genes.
    Seminars in Oncology Nursing 02/2011; 27(1):21-33.
  • Source
    Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice 01/2011; 9:1-2. · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice 01/2011; 9:1-1. · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Deborah J MacDonald, Kathleen R Blazer, Jeffrey N Weitzel
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rapidly evolving genetic and genomic technologies for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA) are revolutionizing the approach to targeted therapy and cancer screening and prevention, heralding the era of personalized medicine. Although many academic medical centers provide GCRA services, most people receive their medical care in the community setting. However, few community clinicians have the knowledge or time needed to adequately select, apply, and interpret genetic/genomic tests. This article describes alternative approaches to the delivery of GCRA services, profiling the City of Hope Cancer Screening & Prevention Program Network (CSPPN) academic and community-based health center partnership as a model for the delivery of the highest-quality evidence-based GCRA services while promoting research participation in the community setting. Growth of the CSPPN was enabled by information technology, with videoconferencing for telemedicine and Web conferencing for remote participation in interdisciplinary genetics tumor boards. Grant support facilitated the establishment of an underserved minority outreach clinic in the regional County hospital. Innovative clinician education, technology, and collaboration are powerful tools to extend GCRA expertise from a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, enabling diffusion of evidenced-base genetic/genomic information and best practice into the community setting.
    Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network: JNCCN 05/2010; 8(5):615-24. · 4.24 Impact Factor
  • Cancer Research 02/2010; 69(24 Supplement):3073-3073. · 9.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer are increasingly presenting for genetic cancer risk assessment (GCRA). To explore the personal and family impact of GCRA, four focus groups were conducted of women seen for risk assessment. Participants were 22 primarily non-Latina White women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Analysis of the data identified new themes related to balancing time to assimilate risk information with the need to make timely healthcare decisions, physicians' lack of sufficient genetic knowledge, and concern for daughters regardless of the daughters' age. Other themes related to protecting others, knowledge as empowerment, reassessing personal attribution of cancer risk, managing uncertainty, reappraising body image, and experiencing divergent family responses to communication of cancer risk and healthcare decisions. Understanding the personal and family impact of GCRA may enable genetics professionals to tailor their counseling efforts to better meet the needs of these women. Additional research is needed to extend these findings and identify interventions to support positive outcomes of GCRA.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 11/2009; 19(2):148-60. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To describe nongenetics clinicians' perceptions and knowledge of cancer genetics and laws prohibiting genetic discrimination, attitudes toward the use of cancer genetic testing, and referral practices. Invitations to participate were sent to a random stratified sample of California Medical Association members and to all members of California Association of Nurse Practitioners and California Latino Medical Association. Responders in active practice were eligible and completed a 47-item survey. There were 1181 qualified participants (62% physicians). Although 96% viewed genetic testing as beneficial for their patients, 75% believed fear of genetic discrimination would cause patients to decline testing. More than 60% were not aware of federal or California laws prohibiting health insurance discrimination--concern about genetic discrimination was selected as a reason for nonreferral by 11%. A positive attitude toward genetic testing was the strongest predictor of referral (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 2.24-5.63], P < 0.001) in stepwise logistic regression analyses. The higher the belief in genetic discrimination, the less likely a participant was to refer (odds ratio: 0.72 [95% confidence interval: 0.518-0.991], P < 0.05), whereas more knowledge of genetic discrimination law was associated with comfort recommending (odds ratio: 1.18 [95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.25], P < 0.001) and actual referral (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 2.24-5.63], P < 0.001). Concerns about genetic discrimination and knowledge deficits may be barriers to cancer genetics referrals. Clinician education may help promote access to cancer screening and prevention.
    Genetics in medicine: official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 09/2008; 10(9):691-8. · 3.92 Impact Factor
  • EJC Supplements 04/2008; 6(7):169-169. · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diagnosis of ovarian cancer often portends a poor prognosis with significant quality-of-life (QOL) concerns. We report on a pilot study that tested the feasibility of a structured, ovarian cancer psychoeducational intervention (OCPI). Patients (N = 33) were randomly assigned to either the control or OCPI study arms in which those in the intervention arm received 4 sequential, structured, in-person educational sessions. Data were collected at the time of accrual and at 1 and 3 months postaccrual. This study demonstrated the feasibility of a structured psychoeducational program in an outpatient clinical setting. Study findings underscore the importance of developing interventions that address the 4 QOL domains impacted by ovarian cancer and support initiating a comprehensive psychoeducational intervention earlier in the course of illness.
    Journal of Cancer Education 02/2008; 23(4):214-21. · 0.88 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

477 Citations
306.18 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 2005–2011
    • City of Hope National Medical Center
      • • Division of Clinical Cancer Genetics
      • • Division of Nursing Research and Education
      Duarte, California, United States
  • 2002
    • Beckman Research Institute
      Duarte, California, United States