Predictors for participation in DNA self-sampling of childhood cancer survivors in Switzerland

1. INTRODUCTION

Cancer survivorship and associated health complications have become increasingly important with improved childhood cancer survival.[1] Chronic conditions like cardiac, pulmonary, auditory, endocrine, reproductive, and neurocognitive complications, and second primary neoplasms (SPNs) are gaining importance in research and clinical care.[2] By age 50 years, childhood cancer survivors have twice as many severe chronic health conditions compared to controls.[3] Mortality in survivors is more than 10-times higher than in the general population.[4] While many demographic, clinical, and treatment-related risk factors are known, the contribution of genetic variation in the development of health complications is still poorly understood. Therefore, research group collect germline DNA samples systematically to enable research on genetic risk factors.[5–7] Self-sampling of germline DNA by participants has increased the reach of sample collection because many do not attend regular medical care. Since the 1990’s buccal swabs are used. In the 2010’s saliva collection kits became widely available which are easy to use and yield DNA of good quality and sufficient quantity.[8] Saliva collection kits do not need time-sensitive processing or cooling like blood, but can be collected, transported, and stored in ambient conditions for years. Collection of saliva samples by participants themselves is feasible and effective.[5] Self-collection may, however, be affected by participation bias. Ness et al. identified female sex, white race/ethnicity, college graduation, never smoking, accessing the healthcare system in the past 2 years, and having a second malignant neoplasm as predictors for participating in saliva sample self-collection.[5] Outside of the US, predictors for participation in childhood cancer survivors have not been studied. They might differ based on the perception of the healthcare system and acceptance of genetic research. We assessed the response rate and investigated predictors for participation in saliva self-sampling in Switzerland as part of the national Germline DNA Biobanking for Childhood Cancer and Blood Disorders (BISKIDS) project.

2. METHODS

3. RESULTS

3.1. Characteristics of cohort

We traced and contacted 928 of 1,215 eligible childhood cancer survivors (Figure 1). Of those we contacted, 463 (50%) returned a germline DNA sample. Median age at diagnosis was 8.7 years (interquartile range [IQR] 3-13) and at invitation 26.5 years (IQR 19-37; Table 1). The most common diagnoses were central nervous system tumours (28%) and lymphomas (21%) which reflected our selection process of inviting former childhood cancer patients with pulmotoxic and ototoxic treatments. Most patients had been treated with chemotherapy, about two thirds with radiotherapy, and a minority with haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Relapse had been confirmed in 21% of survivors, a second primary neoplasm in 4% and a cancer predisposition syndrome (CPS) in 5%. Survivors were predominantly from the German (n=633, 68%) language region and the remaining from the French (n=262, 28%) and Italian (33, 4%) language region, which roughly reflects the language distribution in Switzerland.

View this table:

• View inline
• View popup

Table 1:

Characteristics of 928 Swiss childhood cancer survivors invited to home collection of germline DNA, stratified by participation status.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. Flowchart of the response to invitation to the BISKIDS home collection of germline DNA in 928 patients.

Legend: ICCC-3, international classification of childhood cancer, edition 3; n, number

4. DISCUSSION

This study described participation of Swiss childhood cancer survivors in home saliva collection for germline DNA extraction. We confirmed previous findings of about 50% participation in home DNA self-collection. Foreign nationality was a strong predictor for non-participation. Survivors with known CPSs and aged 30-39 years were also less likely to participate. In contrast, survivors with second primary neoplasms were more likely to participate. Most participating survivors wanted to be informed about incidental findings that might be relevant to their health and most agreed to their samples being available for research after their death.

The overall response rate of 50% was comparable to other DNA sample self-collections from home. Ness et al. reported 54% participation on 10,356 eligible adult childhood cancer survivors[5] and Dykema found 54% participation in 8,081 adults in the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study.[11] Nishita et al. offered an incentive of 25US$ for returning a saliva sample which led to 59% participation of 967 adults in a smoking cessation trial, which was only slightly higher than in studies without incentive.[12] Lower participation was found in genetic assessment of preterm birth where 23% of 708 mothers participated.[13] Higher participation rates were achieved in an active clinical setting with patient-caregiver interaction where 97% of 155 adults from the US participated.[14]

Foreign nationality was strongly associated with non-participation in concordance with a previous study from our group on response to questionnaire studies.[15] This could be related to language issues affecting understanding or reluctance to participate in research due to lower confidence in research. Foreign nationality is also linked to lower socioeconomic status, which was a predictor for lower participation in research.[16] Easy to understand information material, maybe in more languages, and information by phone might counteract these differences in participation. Our findings on language difference were in contrast to a large Swiss survey on willingness to participate in personalized health research,[16] and our group’s previous publication on participation in a questionnaire study,[15] where German speaking people were more likely to participate. The former was sent from the previously treating institutions and the latter form a German speaking research institution. In our study, the invitation was sent off from Geneva hospital, situated in the French speaking language region, which might have improved acceptance of the study of the CCS living in this language region. Survivors with known CPSs were less willing to participate in our study. Reasons could be the impression of futility as participants were already investigated, fear of further findings, or bad experiences with genetic workup. Survivors with second primary neoplasms tended to participate more, potentially because they were seeking explanations for their multiple neoplasms. Lower participation in older survivors might be reflective of being more distanced to the previous disease or in a busy phase of their lives (caring for children and being active at work).

A limitation of our study was the lack of information on reasons for non-participation. We further did not send additional sampling kits with reminders which might have prevented survivors from participating who had discarded their kit already. Strengths were the availability of clinical information including CPSs. Our results of the study are likely representative for childhood cancer survivors in other countries with similar trust in healthcare institutions and responsible (genetic) research.

Our study illustrates that home saliva collection through a process completely relying on mail is feasible and yields a response rate of about 50%. Specific survivor groups (foreign nationality, age 30-39 years, and patients with cancer predisposition syndromes) were less likely to participate which needs to be taken into account when studies are planned.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests

STROBE Checklist

Supplementary File.

Funding

This study is supported by the CANSEARCH Foundation for BISKIDS, the host biobank BaHOP, the research study GECCOS, and salary support to Nicolas Waespe and Sven Strebel. Further funding comes from the Swiss National Science Foundation (31BL30_185396), and Swiss Cancer Research (KFS-4722-02-2019, KLS/KFS-4825-01-2019).

The funding bodies have no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing this manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The Geneva Cantonal Commission for Research Ethics has approved the BaHOP biobank (approval PB_2017-00533) and the Genetic Risks for Childhood Cancer Complications Switzerland (GECCOS) study, which will utilize the samples (approval 2020-01723).

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04702321

Consent for publication

All participants signed informed consents themselves or through their guardians.

Availability of data and materials

Datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request for specific projects.

Authors’ contributions

NW: Conceptualization, Design, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Project administration, Writing - all stages, Visualization.

SSt: Project administration, Writing – Reviewing and Editing

FB, LM: Writing – Reviewing and Editing

TN: Conceptualization, Design, Methodology, Writing – Reviewing and Editing

DM, VM: Conceptualization, Data curation, Project administration, Writing – Reviewing and Editing

FM: Data curation, Project administration, Visualisation, Writing – Reviewing and Editing

AS: Conceptualization, Design, Methodology, Writing - Reviewing and Editing.

CEK, MA: Supervision, Conceptualization, Design, Methodology, Writing - Reviewing and Editing.

All authors have approved the submitted version.