Search

The differential performance of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) by group is one of the major ethical barriers to their clinical use. It is also one of the main practical challenges for any implementation effort. The social repercussions of how people are grouped in PRS research must be considered in communications with research participants, including return of results. Here, we outline the decisions faced and choices made by a large multi-site clinical implementation study returning PRSs to diverse participants in handling this issue of differential performance. Our approach to managing the complexities associated with the differential performance of PRSs serves as a case study that can help future implementers of PRSs to plot an anticipatory course in response to this issue., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests A.C.F.L. owns some stock in Fabric Genomics; E.D.E. is an employee and stockholder of Invitae, advisor and stockholder of Taproot Health, and advisor and stockholder of Exir; R.C.G. receives compensation for advising the following companies: Allelica, Atria, Fabric, Genomic Life, and Juniper Genomics; and is co-founder of Genome Medical and Nurture Genomics; E.E.K. has received personal fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, 23&Me, Allelica, and Illumina; has received research funding from Allelica; and serves on the advisory boards for Encompass Biosciences, Overtone, and Galatea Bio; N.L. received personal fees from Illumina Inc; E.P. is a paid consultant for Allelica Inc.; M.S. is a member of the Institutional Review Board of the All of Us Research Program; J.W.S. is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Sensorium Therapeutics (with equity), has received grant support from Biogen, Inc., and is PI of a collaborative study of the genetics of depression and bipolar disorder sponsored by 23andMe for which 23andMe provides analysis time as in-kind support but no payments., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) hold promise for disease risk assessment and prevention. The Genomic Medicine at Veterans Affairs (GenoVA) Study is addressing three main challenges to the clinical implementation of PRSs in preventive care: defining and determining their clinical utility, implementing them in time-constrained primary care settings, and countering their potential to exacerbate healthcare disparities. The study processes used to test patients, report their PRS results to them and their primary care providers (PCPs), and promote the use of those results in clinical decision-making are modeled on common practices in primary care. The following diseases were chosen for their prevalence and familiarity to PCPs: coronary artery disease; type 2 diabetes; atrial fibrillation; and breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. A randomized clinical trial (RCT) design and primary outcome of time-to-new-diagnosis of a target disease bring methodological rigor to the question of the clinical utility of PRS implementation. The study's pragmatic RCT design enhances its relevance to how PRS might reasonably be implemented in primary care. Steps the study has taken to promote health equity include the thoughtful handling of genetic ancestry in PRS construction and reporting and enhanced recruitment strategies to address underrepresentation in research participation. To date, enhanced recruitment efforts have been both necessary and successful: participants of underrepresented race and ethnicity groups have been less likely to enroll in the study than expected but ultimately achieved proportional representation through targeted efforts. The GenoVA Study experience to date offers insights for evaluating the clinical utility of equitable PRS implementation in adult primary care., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests P.N. reports research grants from Allelica, Apple, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Genentech/Roche, and Novartis; and personal fees from Allelica, Apple, AstraZeneca, Blackstone Life Sciences, Eli Lilly & Co, Foresite Labs, Genentech/Roche, GV, HeartFlow, Magnet Biomedicine, and Novartis; scientific advisory board membership of Esperion Therapeutics, Preciseli, and TenSixteen Bio; status as a scientific co-founder of TenSixteen Bio; equity in MyOme, Preciseli, and TenSixteen Bio; and spousal employment at Vertex Pharmaceuticals, all unrelated to the present work. S.A.L. is an employee of Novartis as of July 18, 2022, has previously received sponsored research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Fitbit, Medtronic, Premier, and IBM, and has consulted for Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Blackstone Life Sciences, and Invitae. A.C.F.L. reports owning stock in Fabric Genomics. R.C.G. has received compensation for advising Allelica, Atria, Fabric, Genome Web, Genomic Life, and Juniper Genomics and is co-founder of Genome Medical and Nurture Genomics. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Newborn genomic sequencing (NBSeq) to screen for medically important genetic information is of considerable interest but data characterizing the actionability of such findings, and the downstream medical efforts in response to discovery of unanticipated genetic risk variants, are lacking. From a clinical trial of comprehensive exome sequencing in 127 apparently healthy infants and 32 infants in intensive care, we previously identified 17 infants (10.7%) with unanticipated monogenic disease risks (uMDRs). In this analysis, we assessed actionability for each of these uMDRs with a modified ClinGen actionability semiquantitative metric (CASQM) and created radar plots representing degrees of penetrance of the condition, severity of the condition, effectiveness of intervention, and tolerability of intervention. In addition, we followed each of these infants for 3-5 years after disclosure and tracked the medical actions prompted by these findings. All 17 uMDR findings were scored as moderately or highly actionable on the CASQM (mean 9, range: 7-11 on a 0-12 scale) and several distinctive visual patterns emerged on the radar plots. In three infants, uMDRs revealed unsuspected genetic etiologies for existing phenotypes, and in the remaining 14 infants, uMDRs provided risk stratification for future medical surveillance. In 13 infants, uMDRs prompted screening for at-risk family members, three of whom underwent cancer-risk-reducing surgeries. Although assessments of clinical utility and cost-effectiveness will require larger datasets, these findings suggest that large-scale comprehensive sequencing of newborns will reveal numerous actionable uMDRs and precipitate substantial, and in some cases lifesaving, downstream medical care in newborns and their family members., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests R.C.G. has received compensation for advising Allelica, Atria, Fabric, Genome Web, Genomic Life, and VinBigData and is co-founder of Genome Medical and Nurture Genomics. N.S. is a member of the scientific advisory board for Neuberg Center for Genomic Medicine. C.A.G. has received compensation for consulting for Kate Therapeutics. T.W.Y. has consulted and received compensation or honoraria from Eisai, BioMarin, GeneTx, Takeda, and Alnylam and serves on the scientific advisory boards for several not-for-profit rare disease foundations. B.Z. has received compensation for consulting for Novartis Gene Therapies. M.S.L. is employed by a not-for-profit, fee-for-service clinical laboratory at Mass General Brigham offering genomic screening. P.B.A. is a member of the scientific advisory boards for GeneDx and Illumina, Inc. A.L.M. is a member of the board of the Greenwall Foundation and is on the scientific advisory boards for Nurture Genomics, Geisinger Research, and the Morgridge Institute for Research. H.L.R. is employed as the medical and clinical laboratory director for a fee-for-service laboratory offering genomic sequencing at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. I.A.H. is a member of the scientific advisory board for Biomarin for vosoritide. A.H.B. has received funding from Muscular Dystrophy Association (USA), Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc, Avidity Biosciences, Dynacure SAS, Kate Therapeutics, and Pfizer Inc; has consulted and received compensation or honoraria from Audentes Therapeutics, F. Hoffman-LaRoche AG, GLG Inc, Guidepoint Global LLC, and Kate Therapeutics Inc; and holds equity in Kinea Bio and Kate Therapeutics Inc., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Newborn screening (NBS) dramatically improves outcomes in severe childhood disorders by treatment before symptom onset. In many genetic diseases, however, outcomes remain poor because NBS has lagged behind drug development. Rapid whole-genome sequencing (rWGS) is attractive for comprehensive NBS because it concomitantly examines almost all genetic diseases and is gaining acceptance for genetic disease diagnosis in ill newborns. We describe prototypic methods for scalable, parentally consented, feedback-informed NBS and diagnosis of genetic diseases by rWGS and virtual, acute management guidance (NBS-rWGS). Using established criteria and the Delphi method, we reviewed 457 genetic diseases for NBS-rWGS, retaining 388 (85%) with effective treatments. Simulated NBS-rWGS in 454,707 UK Biobank subjects with 29,865 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with 388 disorders had a true negative rate (specificity) of 99.7% following root cause analysis. In 2,208 critically ill children with suspected genetic disorders and 2,168 of their parents, simulated NBS-rWGS for 388 disorders identified 104 (87%) of 119 diagnoses previously made by rWGS and 15 findings not previously reported (NBS-rWGS negative predictive value 99.6%, true positive rate [sensitivity] 88.8%). Retrospective NBS-rWGS diagnosed 15 children with disorders that had been undetected by conventional NBS. In 43 of the 104 children, had NBS-rWGS-based interventions been started on day of life 5, the Delphi consensus was that symptoms could have been avoided completely in seven critically ill children, mostly in 21, and partially in 13. We invite groups worldwide to refine these NBS-rWGS conditions and join us to prospectively examine clinical utility and cost effectiveness., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests K.P.H., C.M.K., S.S.M., and D.T. are employees and shareholders of Illumina, Inc. G.D,A., B.M., S.L., and T.D. are employees and shareholders of Alexion Pharmaceuticals. E.F. and M.G.R. are employees and shareholders of Fabric Genomics, Inc. M.K. and S.S. are employees and shareholders of Genomenon, Inc. C.K., G.P., S.S., S.P., and A.R.W. are employees and shareholders of TileDB, Inc. S.K. is an employee and shareholder of Luna PBC, Inc. S.K. has filed a patent related to this work., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Over 100 million research participants around the world have had research array-based genotyping (GT) or genome sequencing (GS), but only a small fraction of these have been offered return of actionable genomic findings (gRoR). Between 2017 and 2021, we analyzed genomic results from 36,417 participants in the Mass General Brigham Biobank and offered to confirm and return pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (PLPVs) in 59 genes. Variant verification prior to participant recontact revealed that GT falsely identified PLPVs in 44.9% of samples, and GT failed to identify 72.0% of PLPVs detected in a subset of samples that were also sequenced. GT and GS detected verified PLPVs in 1% and 2.5% of the cohort, respectively. Of 256 participants who were alerted that they carried actionable PLPVs, 37.5% actively or passively declined further disclosure. 76.3% of those carrying PLPVs were unaware that they were carrying the variant, and over half of those met published professional criteria for genetic testing but had never been tested. This gRoR protocol cost approximately $129,000 USD per year in laboratory testing and research staff support, representing $14 per participant whose DNA was analyzed or $3,224 per participant in whom a PLPV was confirmed and disclosed. These data provide logistical details around gRoR that could help other investigators planning to return genomic results., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests S.T.W. has received compensation from UpToDate. J.W.S. is a member of the Leon Levy Foundation Neuroscience Advisory Board and received an honorarium for an internal seminar at Biogen. He is PI of a collaborative study of the genetics of depression and bipolar disorder sponsored by 23andMe for which 23andMe provides analysis time as in-kind support but no payments. R.C.G. has received compensation for advising the following companies: AIA, Genomic Life, Grail, Humanity, Kneed Media, Plumcare, OptumLabs, Verily, and Vibrent Health. He is co-founder of Genome Medical., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although genome sequencing is increasingly available in clinical and research settings, many questions remain about the interpretation of sequencing data. In the MedSeq Project, we explored how much effort is required to evaluate and report on more than 4,500 genes reportedly associated with monogenic conditions, as well as pharmacogenomic (PGx) markers, blood antigen serotyping, and polygenic risk scores in 100 individuals (50 with cardiomyopathy and 50 healthy) randomized to the sequencing arm. We defined the quality thresholds for determining the need for Sanger confirmation. Finally, we examined the effort needed and new findings revealed by reanalyzing each genome (6-23 months after initial analysis; mean 13 months). Monogenic disease risk and carrier status were reported in 21% and 94% of participants, respectively. Only two participants had no monogenic disease risk or carrier status identified. For the PGx results (18 genotypes in six genes for five drugs), the identified diplotypes prompted recommendation for non-standard dosing of at least one of the analyzed drugs in 95% of participants. For blood antigen studies, we found that 31% of participants had a rare blood antigen genotype. In the cardiomyopathy cohort, an explanation for disease was identified in 48% of individuals. Over the course of the study, 14 variants were reclassified and, upon reanalysis, 18 new variants met criteria for reporting. These findings highlight the quantity of medically relevant findings from a broad analysis of genomic sequencing data as well as the need for periodic reinterpretation and reanalysis of data for both diagnostic indications and secondary findings., (Copyright © 2019 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Genomic sequencing provides many opportunities in newborn clinical care, but the challenges of interpreting and reporting newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) results need to be addressed for its broader and effective application. The BabySeq Project is a pilot randomized clinical trial that explores the medical, behavioral, and economic impacts of nGS in well newborns and those admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Here we present childhood-onset and actionable adult-onset disease risk, carrier status, and pharmacogenomics findings from nGS of 159 newborns in the BabySeq Project. nGS revealed a risk of childhood-onset disease in 15/159 (9.4%) newborns; none of the disease risks were anticipated based on the infants' known clinical or family histories. nGS also revealed actionable adult-onset disease risk in 3/85 (3.5%) newborns whose parents consented to receive this information. Carrier status for recessive diseases and pharmacogenomics variants were reported in 88% and 5% of newborns, respectively. Additional indication-based analyses were performed in 29/32 (91%) NICU newborns and 6/127 (5%) healthy newborns who later had presentations that prompted a diagnostic analysis. No variants that sufficiently explained the reason for the indications were identified; however, suspicious but uncertain results were reported in five newborns. Testing parental samples contributed to the interpretation and reporting of results in 13/159 (8%) newborns. Our results suggest that nGS can effectively detect risk and carrier status for a wide range of disorders that are not detectable by current newborn screening assays or predicted based on the infant's known clinical or family history, and the interpretation of results can substantially benefit from parental testing., (Copyright © 2018 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Evaluating the pathogenicity of a variant is challenging given the plethora of types of genetic evidence that laboratories consider. Deciding how to weigh each type of evidence is difficult, and standards have been needed. In 2015, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) published guidelines for the assessment of variants in genes associated with Mendelian diseases. Nine molecular diagnostic laboratories involved in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium piloted these guidelines on 99 variants spanning all categories (pathogenic, likely pathogenic, uncertain significance, likely benign, and benign). Nine variants were distributed to all laboratories, and the remaining 90 were evaluated by three laboratories. The laboratories classified each variant by using both the laboratory's own method and the ACMG-AMP criteria. The agreement between the two methods used within laboratories was high (K-alpha = 0.91) with 79% concordance. However, there was only 34% concordance for either classification system across laboratories. After consensus discussions and detailed review of the ACMG-AMP criteria, concordance increased to 71%. Causes of initial discordance in ACMG-AMP classifications were identified, and recommendations on clarification and increased specification of the ACMG-AMP criteria were made. In summary, although an initial pilot of the ACMG-AMP guidelines did not lead to increased concordance in variant interpretation, comparing variant interpretations to identify differences and having a common framework to facilitate resolution of those differences were beneficial for improving agreement, allowing iterative movement toward increased reporting consistency for variants in genes associated with monogenic disease., (Copyright © 2016 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine., (Copyright © 2016 American Society of Human Genetics. All rights reserved.)

Assessing the significance of novel genetic variants revealed by DNA sequencing is a major challenge to the integration of genomic techniques with medical practice. Many variants remain difficult to classify by traditional genetic methods. Computational methods have been developed that could contribute to classifying these variants, but they have not been properly validated and are generally not considered mature enough to be used effectively in a clinical setting. We developed a computational method for predicting the effects of missense variants detected in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). We used a curated clinical data set of 74 missense variants in six genes associated with HCM to train and validate an automated predictor. The predictor is based on support vector regression and uses phylogenetic and structural features specific to genes involved in HCM. Ten-fold cross validation estimated our predictor's sensitivity at 94% (95% confidence interval: 83%-98%) and specificity at 89% (95% confidence interval: 72%-100%). This corresponds to an odds ratio of 10 for a prediction of pathogenic (95% confidence interval: 4.0-infinity), or an odds ratio of 9.9 for a prediction of benign (95% confidence interval: 4.6-21). Coverage (proportion of variants for which a prediction was made) was 57% (95% confidence interval: 49%-64%). This performance exceeds that of existing methods that are not specifically designed for HCM. The accuracy of this predictor provides support for the clinical use of automated predictions alongside family segregation and population frequency data in the interpretation of new missense variants and suggests future development of similar tools for other diseases., (Copyright © 2011 The American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype is the single most important determinant to the common form of Alzheimer disease (AD) yet identified. Several studies show that family history of AD is not entirely accounted for by APOE genotype. Also, there is evidence for an interaction between APOE genotype and gender. We carried out a complex segregation analysis in 636 nuclear families of consecutively ascertained and rigorously diagnosed probands in the Multi-Institutional Research in Alzheimer Genetic Epidemiology study in order to derive models of disease transmission which account for the influences of APOE genotype of the proband and gender. In the total group of families, models postulating sporadic occurrence, no major gene effect, random environmental transmission, and Mendelian inheritance were rejected. Transmission of AD in families of probands with at least one epsilon 4 allele best fit a dominant model. Moreover, single gene inheritance best explained clustering of the disorder in families of probands lacking epsilon 4, but a more complex genetic model or multiple genetic models may ultimately account for risk in this group of families. Our results also suggest that susceptibility to AD differs between men and women regardless of the proband's APOE status. Assuming a dominant model, AD appears to be completely penetrant in women, whereas only 62%-65% of men with predisposing genotypes develop AD. However, parameter estimates from the arbitrary major gene model suggests that AD is expressed dominantly in women and additively in men. These observations, taken together with epidemiologic data, are consistent with the hypothesis of an interaction between genes and other biological factors affecting disease susceptibility.

Hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) is an autosomal dominant trait responsible for approximately 6% of colorectal cancers. Linkage of the HNPCC trait to the D2S123 locus on 2p15-16 has previously been reported in two families. This HNPCC locus is now designated "COCA1." We have tested seven Canadian HNPCC families, who have a variety of clinical presentations, for linkage to a panel of microsatellite polymorphisms in the vicinity of D2S123. One family was clearly linked to the COCA1 locus (LOD = 4.21), and a second family is likely to be linked (LOD = 0.92). In three families linkage was excluded. In the remaining two families the data were inconclusive. In the linked family, individuals with cancer of the endometrium or ureter share a common haplotype with 12 family members with colorectal cancer. This supports the suspected association between these extracolonic neoplasms and the HNPCC syndrome. In addition, five of the six individuals with adenomatous polyps (but no colorectal cancer) have the same haplotype as the affected individuals, while the sixth carries a recombination. One individual with colorectal cancer carries a recombination that places the COCA1 locus telomeric to D2S123. This study localizes the COCA1 gene to an 8-cM region that is consistent with the location of the hMSH2 gene. We also confirm that families presently classified as HNPCC are genetically heterogeneous.