Sharne Limb
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
6 Papers
Sharne Limb is an academic researcher from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Population. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications.
Chat about Author
Papers
Population-based Genetic Testing of Asymptomatic Women for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility
Simone M Rowley,Lyon Mascarenhas,Lisa Devereux,Na Li,Na Li,Kaushalya C. Amarasinghe,Magnus Zethoven,Jue Er Amanda Lee,Alexandra Lewis,James A. Morgan,Sharne Limb,Mary-Anne Young,Paul A. James,Paul A. James,Alison H. Trainer,Alison H. Trainer,Ian G. Campbell,Ian G. Campbell +17 more
TL;DR: Within this cohort of healthy Australian women, HBOC genetic testing was well accepted, and the majority of high-risk gene carriers identified would not meet eligibility criteria for genetic testing based on their existing family history.
63
Human Genetics Society of Australasia Position Statement: Use of Polygenic Scores in Clinical Practice and Population Health
Mary-Anne Young,Tatiane Yanes,Anne E. Cust,Kate Dunlop,Sharne Limb,Ainsley J Newson,Rebecca Purvis,Lavvina Thiyagarajan,Rodney J. Scott,Kunal Verma,Paul A. James,Julia Steinberg +11 more
TL;DR: The Human Genetics Society of Australasia (HGSA) as mentioned in this paper provides the viewpoint of the human genetics society of Australia regarding the clinical application of disease-associated polygenic scores in both individual patients and population health.
Communicating Personal Melanoma Polygenic Risk Information: Participants’ Experiences of Genetic Counseling in a Community-Based Study
Amelia K Smit,David Espinoza,Georgina Fenton,Judy Kirk,Jessica S. Innes,Michael McGovern,Sharne Limb,On Behalf Of The Managing Your Risk Study Group,Erin Turbitt,Anne E. Cust +9 more
TL;DR: In this article , a mixed-methods study aimed to assess the acceptability of a genetic counselor (GC) phone call in communicating polygenic risk information in the Melanoma Genomics Managing Your Risk randomized controlled trial.
Defining next steps in the clinical implementation of polygenic scores: A landscape analysis of professional groups' perspectives.
Rebecca Purvis,Laura E. Forrest,Mary-Anne Young,Sharne Limb,Paul James,Natalie Taylor +5 more
Abstract: PURPOSE
Professional perspectives on polygenic risk scores (PGS) have surged in-line with significant research investment. It is unclear whether these perspectives are leading the healthcare sector toward a comprehensive implementation approach. This scoping review addresses this knowledge gap, analysing available publications for concurring and discordant perspectives.
METHODS
Methodology followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Six databases were systematically searched alongside screening of professional websites. Descriptive and deductive content analyses were completed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation.
RESULTS
28 perspectives were analysed. Implementation was supportable if evidentiary thresholds for clinical utility could be met, with exceptions being in-vitro fertilisation and prenatal settings. Evidence-base and relative advantage of PGS were the strongest determinants of implementation success, with resourcing also emphasised. Key strategies included ongoing research, developing education materials, and facilitating relay of information. Attention was not paid to leadership, nor to stakeholder inter-relationships. There was no recommended framework to facilitate the clinical implementation of PGS.
CONCLUSION
The steps towards executing implementation remain vague. Commonalities in perspectives suggest value in a transferable approach. If PGS are to be successful, policy makers and leaders must consider effective resource allocation by addressing priority barriers and utilising implementation methodologies. Continuing efforts to establish PGS clinical utility and value, guidelines and policies, and educational materials are needed.
TRACEBACK: Testing of Historical Tubo-Ovarian Cancer Patients for Hereditary Risk Genes as a Cancer Prevention Strategy in Family Members
Rachel Delahunty,Linh Nguyen,Stuart Craig,Belinda Creighton,Dinuka Ariyaratne,Dale W. Garsed,Elizabeth L. Christie,Sian Fereday,Lesley Andrews,Alexandra Lewis,Sharne Limb,Ahwan Pandey,Joy Hendley,Nadia Traficante,Natalia Carvajal,Amanda B. Spurdle,Bryony A. Thompson,Michael T. Parsons,Victoria Beshay,Mila Volcheck,Timothy Semple,Richard Lupat,Ken Doig,Jiaan Yu,Xiao Qing Chen,Anna Marsh,Christopher G. Love,Sanela Bilic,M. V. Beilin,Cassandra B. Nichols,Christina Greer,Yeh Chen Lee,Sue Gerty,Lynette Gill,Emma Newton,Julie Howard,Rachel Williams,Christie Norris,Andrew N. Stephens,Erin Tutty,Courtney Smyth,S O’Connell,Tom Jobling,Colin J.R. Stewart,Adeline Tan,Stephen B. Fox,Nicholas Pachter,Jason Li,Jason Ellul,Gisela Mir Arnau,Mary-Anne Young,Louisa G. Gordon,Laura E Forrest,Marion Harris,Kathleen Livingstone,Jane Hill,Georgia Chenevix-Trench,Paul A. Cohen,Penelope M. Webb,Michael Friedlander,Paul A. James,David D.L. Bowtell,Kathryn Alsop +62 more
TL;DR: Rec retrospective genetic testing to identify PVs in previously untested deceased probands with TOC is demonstrated to be feasible, overcame ethical and logistic challenges, and allows identification of at-risk families for cancer prevention.