Richard L. Bradshaw

PURPOSE: Over 90% of people with hereditary cancer syndromes in the United States remain unidentified. The Genetic Cancer Risk Detector (GARDE) is an open-source, electronic health record (EHR)–integrated, digital health platform that can facilitate genetic cancer risk assessment and genetic testing. This study evaluates its budget impact on health care institutions. METHODS: A budget impact analysis was performed from the perspective of a US health care provider system over a 3-year horizon. Data from the BRIDGE randomized controlled trial data from the University of Utah Health (UHealth) were used, where eligible primary care patients were screened for genetic cancer risk via GARDE. Costs of GARDE were categorized across planning, implementation, and operational phases. Revenue projections were based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reimbursement rates. Scenario analyses varied uptake of interventions, surveillance intervals, reimbursement rates, and implementation scale. RESULTS: Of 1,444 patients identified by GARDE at UHealth and enrolled in the BRIDGE trial, 205 completed genetic testing, with 15 found to carry pathogenic variants. The total 3-year implementation cost was $29,217 US dollars (USD). Revenue from guideline-recommended procedures totaled $86,563 USD, yielding a net positive budget impact of $57,347 USD. Most revenue (76.4%) was generated by surgical risk-reduction procedures. Scenario analyses revealed high sensitivity to cancer risk-reducing surgery uptake and implementation scale. Modeling 100% uptake of risk-reducing surgeries increased revenue to $128,102 USD, while 20-fold scaling of the implementation population increased revenue to $1.7 million USD. Commercial insurance reimbursement assumptions further amplified revenue. CONCLUSION: GARDE enables scalable hereditary cancer risk assessment within a health care provider system. Even with modest uptake, it yields a positive financial return, and significantly greater revenue is achievable with broader implementation. These findings support adoption of EHR-integrated tools to enhance clinical outcomes in precision cancer prevention and risk management, in an economically viable manner.

Background: Chatbots are increasingly used to deliver health education, patient engagement, and access to healthcare services. GARDE-Chat is an open-source platform designed to facilitate the development, deployment, and dissemination of chatbot-based digital health interventions across different domains and settings. Materials and Methods: GARDE-Chat was developed through an iterative process informed by real-world use cases to guide prioritization of key features. The tool was developed as an open-source platform to promote collaboration, broad dissemination, and impact across research and clinical domains. Results: GARDE-Chat’s main features include (1) a visual authoring interface that allows non-programmers to design chatbots; (2) support for scripted, large language model (LLM)-based and hybrid chatbots; (3) capacity to share chatbots with researchers and institutions; (4) integration with external applications and data sources such as electronic health records and REDCap; (5) delivery via web browsers or text messaging; and (6) detailed audit log supporting analyses of chatbot user interactions. Since its first release in July 2022, GARDE-Chat has supported the development of chatbot-based interventions tested in multiple studies, including large pragmatic clinical trials addressing topics such as genetic testing, COVID-19 testing, tobacco cessation, and cancer screening. Discussion: Ongoing challenges include the effort required for developing chatbot scripts, ensuring safe use of LLMs, and integrating with clinical systems. Conclusion: GARDE-Chat is a generalizable platform for creating, implementing, and disseminating scalable chatbot-based population health interventions. It has been validated in several studies, and it is available to researchers and healthcare systems through an open-source mechanism.

PURPOSE: Cascade genetic testing enables identification of relatives at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes, creating opportunities for early detection and prevention. However, uptake of cascade testing remains low, with approximately one-third of eligible relatives completing testing, largely because of reliance on patient-mediated communication. Although clinician-mediated outreach has demonstrated improved efficacy, it is often limited by resource demands. Scalable digital health tools are a promising strategy to address this gap in testing uptake. METHODS: In this quality improvement initiative, we developed a digital cascade chatbot to deliver gene-specific education and facilitate access to genetic services among at-risk relatives. Between October 2024 and January 2025, 100 consecutive probands with a hereditary cancer pathogenic variant seen in a gynecologic oncology clinic were offered a cascade chatbot to share with their relatives. The primary outcome was proband acceptance of the cascade chatbot. Secondary outcomes included sharing of the cascade chatbot with at-risk relatives and relatives' subsequent utilization of genetic services. Outcomes were evaluated through telephone follow-up at 2 weeks and 3 months after chatbot introduction. RESULTS: Fifty-nine of 100 probands reported having relatives who had not undergone genetic testing. Among this group, 58 (98.3%) accepted the cascade chatbot. At 2-week follow-up, 44 of 58 probands (75.9%) had shared the cascade chatbot with at least one relative, and an additional eight (13.8%) reported plans to share. At 3-month follow-up with probands, 48 (82.8%) probands had shared the cascade chatbot with at least one relative. A total of 122 relatives received the cascade chatbot and 96 (78.7%) were reached for 3-month follow-up. Among the 96 relatives reached, 49 (51.0%) had scheduled or completed a genetics appointment, and of them, 36 (73.5%) had completed testing. CONCLUSION: A cascade chatbot was highly acceptable to probands and effectively engaged relatives. Scalable digital health tools may enhance cascade testing and support precision cancer prevention.

Background: Among the alternative solutions being tested to improve access to genetic services, chatbots (or conversational agents) are being increasingly used for service delivery. Despite the growing number of studies on the accessibility and feasibility of chatbot genetic service delivery, limited attention has been paid to user interactions with chatbots in a real-world health care context. Objective: We examined users’ interaction patterns with a pretest cancer genetics education chatbot as well as the associations between users’ clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, chatbot interaction patterns, and genetic testing decisions. Methods: We analyzed data from the experimental arm of Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services, a multisite genetic services pragmatic trial in which participants eligible for hereditary cancer genetic testing based on family history were randomized to receive a chatbot intervention or standard care. In the experimental chatbot arm, participants were offered access to core educational content delivered by the chatbot with the option to select up to 9 supplementary informational prompts and ask open-ended questions. We computed descriptive statistics for the following interaction patterns: prompt selections, open-ended questions, completion status, dropout points, and postchat decisions regarding genetic testing. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationships between clinical and sociodemographic factors and chatbot interaction variables, examining how these factors affected genetic testing decisions. Results: Of the 468 participants who initiated a chat, 391 (83.5%) completed it, with 315 (80.6%) of the completers expressing a willingness to pursue genetic testing. Of the 391 completers, 336 (85.9%) selected at least one informational prompt, 41 (10.5%) asked open-ended questions, and 3 (0.8%) opted for extra examples of risk information. Of the 77 noncompleters, 57 (74%) dropped out before accessing any informational content. Interaction patterns were not associated with clinical and sociodemographic factors except for prompt selection (varied by study site) and completion status (varied by family cancer history type). Participants who selected ≥3 prompts (odds ratio 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.91; P=.03) or asked open-ended questions (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96; P=.04) were less likely to opt for genetic testing. Conclusions: Findings highlight the chatbot’s effectiveness in engaging users and its high acceptability, with most participants completing the chat, opting for additional information, and showing a high willingness to pursue genetic testing. Sociodemographic factors were not associated with interaction patterns, potentially indicating the chatbot’s scalability across diverse populations provided they have internet access. Future efforts should address the concerns of users with high information needs and integrate them into chatbot design to better support informed genetic decision-making.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).

BACKGROUND Among the alternative solutions being tested to improve access to genetic services, chatbots (or conversational agents) are being increasingly used for service delivery. Despite the growing number of studies on the accessibility and feasibility of chatbot genetic service delivery, limited attention has been paid to user interactions with chatbots in a real-world health care context. OBJECTIVE We examined users’ interaction patterns with a pretest cancer genetics education chatbot as well as the associations between users’ clinical and sociodemographic characteristics, chatbot interaction patterns, and genetic testing decisions. METHODS We analyzed data from the experimental arm of Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services, a multisite genetic services pragmatic trial in which participants eligible for hereditary cancer genetic testing based on family history were randomized to receive a chatbot intervention or standard care. In the experimental chatbot arm, participants were offered access to core educational content delivered by the chatbot with the option to select up to 9 supplementary informational prompts and ask open-ended questions. We computed descriptive statistics for the following interaction patterns: prompt selections, open-ended questions, completion status, dropout points, and postchat decisions regarding genetic testing. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationships between clinical and sociodemographic factors and chatbot interaction variables, examining how these factors affected genetic testing decisions. RESULTS Of the 468 participants who initiated a chat, 391 (83.5%) completed it, with 315 (80.6%) of the completers expressing a willingness to pursue genetic testing. Of the 391 completers, 336 (85.9%) selected at least one informational prompt, 41 (10.5%) asked open-ended questions, and 3 (0.8%) opted for extra examples of risk information. Of the 77 noncompleters, 57 (74%) dropped out before accessing any informational content. Interaction patterns were not associated with clinical and sociodemographic factors except for prompt selection (varied by study site) and completion status (varied by family cancer history type). Participants who selected ≥3 prompts (odds ratio 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.91; P=.03) or asked open-ended questions (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96; P=.04) were less likely to opt for genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS Findings highlight the chatbot’s effectiveness in engaging users and its high acceptability, with most participants completing the chat, opting for additional information, and showing a high willingness to pursue genetic testing. Sociodemographic factors were not associated with interaction patterns, potentially indicating the chatbot’s scalability across diverse populations provided they have internet access. Future efforts should address the concerns of users with high information needs and integrate them into chatbot design to better support informed genetic decision-making.

Background: Research on social determinants of genetic testing uptake is limited, particularly among unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE) trial at University of Utah Health and NYU Langone Health, involving 2,760 unaffected patients meeting genetic testing criteria for inherited cancer susceptibility and who were initially randomized to either an automated chatbot or an enhanced standard of care (SOC) genetic services delivery model. We used encounters from the electronic health record (EHR) to measure the uptake of genetic counseling and testing, including dichotomous measures of (1) whether participants initiated pre-test cancer genetic services, (2) completed pre-test cancer genetic services, (3) had genetic testing ordered, and (4) completed genetic testing. We merged zip codes from the EHR to construct census tract-weighted social measures of the Social Vulnerability Index. Multilevel models estimated associations between social vulnerability and genetic services utilization. We tested whether intervention condition (i.e., chatbot vs. SOC) moderated the association of social vulnerability with genetic service utilization. Covariates included study arm, study site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, language preference, rural residence, having a recorded primary care provider, and number of algorithm criteria met. Results: Patients living in areas of medium socioeconomic status (SES) vulnerability had lower odds of initiating pre-test genetic services (adjusted OR [aOR] = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67, 0.98) compared to patients living in low SES vulnerability areas. Patients in medium household vulnerability areas had a lower likelihood of completing pre-test genetic services (aOR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66–0.97) and having genetic testing ordered (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.63–0.99) relative to patients in low household vulnerability areas. We did not find that social vulnerability associations varied by intervention condition. Conclusions: These results underscore the importance of investigating social and structural mechanisms as potential pathways to increasing genetic testing uptake among patients with increased inherited risk of cancer. Census information is publicly available but seldom used to assess social determinants of genetic testing uptake among unaffected populations. Existing and future cohort studies can incorporate census data to derive analytic insights for clinical scientists. Trial registration: BRIDGE was registered as NCT03985852 on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov.

PURPOSE: The GARDE platform uses family history reported in the electronic health record (EHR) to systematically identify eligible patients for genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. The goal of this study was to evaluate the change in effectiveness of GARDE to identify eligible individuals when more comprehensive family history data are provided, thus quantifying the impact of underdocumentation. METHODS: A cohort of 133,764 patients at the University of Utah Health was analyzed with GARDE comparing identification rates using EHR data versus EHR plus data from a statewide population database, the Utah Population Database (UPDB). RESULTS: Compared with EHR alone, EHR + UPDB increased the rate of individuals eligible for genetic testing from 4.1% to 9.2%. In the 44,692 individuals with the most comprehensive family history, eligibility more than quadrupled from 4.6% (EHR alone) to 19.3% (EHR + UPDB). The increase was significant across all demographics, but disparities still remained for historically marginalized minorities (9.2%-13.9% in non-White races compared with 19.7% in White races). CONCLUSION: Augmenting EHR data with family history data from the UPDB substantially improved the detection of individuals eligible for genetic testing of hereditary cancer syndromes in all subgroups. This underscores the importance of improving methods for acquiring family history, in person or in silico. However, these increases did not ameliorate disparities. Continuous disparities are unlikely to be explained by incomplete family history alone and may also be because susceptibility genes, risk variants, and screening guidelines were discovered and developed largely in White races. Addressing disparities will require intentional data collection of family history in historically marginalized minorities and the promotion of genetic and risk assessment studies in more diverse populations to ensure equity and health care.

Motivation: Software is vital for the advancement of biology and medicine. Impact evaluations of scientific software have primarily emphasized traditional citation metrics of associated papers, despite these metrics inadequately capturing the dynamic picture of impact and despite challenges with improper citation. Results: To understand how software developers evaluate their tools, we conducted a survey of participants in the Informatics Technology for Cancer Research (ITCR) program funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). We found that although developers realize the value of more extensive metric collection, they find a lack of funding and time hindering. We also investigated software among this community for how often infrastructure that supports more nontraditional metrics were implemented and how this impacted rates of papers describing usage of the software. We found that infrastructure such as social media presence, more in-depth documentation, the presence of software health metrics, and clear information on how to contact developers seemed to be associated with increased mention rates. Analysing more diverse metrics can enable developers to better understand user engagement, justify continued funding, identify novel use cases, pinpoint improvement areas, and ultimately amplify their software’s impact. Challenges are associated, including distorted or misleading metrics, as well as ethical and security concerns. More attention to nuances involved in capturing impact across the spectrum of biomedical software is needed. For funders and developers, we outline guidance based on experience from our community. By considering how we evaluate software, we can empower developers to create tools that more effectively accelerate biological and medical research progress. Availability and implementation: More information about the analysis, as well as access to data and code is available at https://github.com/fhdsl/ITCR_Metrics_manuscript_website.