Search

Genomics researchers are increasingly interested in what constitutes effective engagement of individuals from underrepresented groups. This is critical for longitudinal projects needed to inform the implementation of precision medicine. Return of results is one opportunity for engagement. The aims of this study were to determine participant perspectives on optimal engagement strategies and priorities for return of results and the extent to which focus groups were an effective modality for gathering input on these topics. We conducted six professionally moderated focus groups with 49 participants in a genomics research study. Transcripts from audio-recorded sessions were coded by two researchers and themes were discussed with the wider research team. All groups raised the issue of mistrust. Individuals participated nonetheless to contribute their perspectives and benefit their community. Many group members preferred engagement modalities that are offered to all participants and allow them to share the nuances of their perspectives over the use of participant representatives and surveys. All groups created a consensus ranking for result return priorities. Results for life-threatening conditions were the highest priority to return, followed by those related to treatable conditions that affect physical or mental health. We advocate for engagement strategies that reach as many participants as possible and allow them to share their perspectives in detail. Such strategies are valued by participants, can be effective for developing return of results policies, and may help institutions become more trustworthy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In-person education and counseling for all people receiving genetic results is the predominant model of disclosure but is challenged by the growing volume of low-impact results generated by sequencing. Evidence suggests that web-based tools may be as effective as in-person counseling at educating individuals about their low-impact results. However, the effects of counseling have not been assessed. To evaluate its utility, carrier results were returned to 459 post-reproductive participants from the ClinSeq cohort within a randomized controlled trial. Participants received education and were randomized to receive counseling or not. Primary outcomes included risk worry, test-related positive experiences, attitudes, and decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction, preferences, and counseling value. There were no differences between participants who received counseling and those who did not in the primary outcomes. Participants who received counseling were more satisfied than those who did not ( x ¯ = 10.2 and 9.5, respectively, p < 0.002, range: 3–12), although overall satisfaction was high. Most participants (92%) randomized to counseling preferred it and valued it because it provided validation of their reactions and an opportunity for interpersonal interaction. Web-based tools address the challenge of returning low-impact results, and these data provide empiric evidence that counseling, although preferred and satisfying, is not critical to achieving desired outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Next-generation sequencing provides the opportunity to practice predictive medicine based on identified variants. Putative loss-of-function (pLOF) variants are common in genomes and understanding their contribution to disease is critical for predictive medicine. To this end, we characterized the consequences of pLOF variants in an exome cohort by iterative phenotyping. Exome data were generated on 951 participants from the ClinSeq cohort and filtered for pLOF variants in genes likely to cause a phenotype in heterozygotes. 103 of 951 exomes had such a pLOF variant and 79 participants were evaluated. Of those 79, 34 had findings or family histories that could be attributed to the variant (28 variants in 18 genes), 2 had indeterminate findings (2 variants in 2 genes), and 43 had no findings or a negative family history for the trait (34 variants in 28 genes). The presence of a phenotype was correlated with two mutation attributes: prior report of pathogenicity for the variant (p = 0.0001) and prior report of other mutations in the same exon (p = 0.0001). We conclude that 1/30 unselected individuals harbor a pLOF mutation associated with a phenotype either in themselves or their family. This is more common than has been assumed and has implications for the setting of prior probabilities of affection status for predictive medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, now in its second funding cycle, is investigating the effectiveness of integrating genomic (exome or genome) sequencing into the clinical care of diverse and medically underserved individuals in a variety of healthcare settings and disease states. The consortium comprises a coordinating center, six funded extramural clinical projects, and an ongoing National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project. Collectively, these projects aim to enroll and sequence over 6,100 participants in four years. At least 60% of participants will be of non-European ancestry or from underserved settings, with the goal of diversifying the populations that are providing an evidence base for genomic medicine. Five of the six clinical projects are enrolling pediatric patients with various phenotypes. One of these five projects is also enrolling couples whose fetus has a structural anomaly, and the sixth project is enrolling adults at risk for hereditary cancer. The ongoing NHGRI intramural project has enrolled primarily healthy adults. Goals of the consortium include assessing the clinical utility of genomic sequencing, exploring medical follow up and cascade testing of relatives, and evaluating patient-provider-laboratory level interactions that influence the use of this technology. The findings from the CSER consortium will offer patients, healthcare systems, and policymakers a clearer understanding of the opportunities and challenges of providing genomic medicine in diverse populations and settings, and contribute evidence toward developing best practices for the delivery of clinically useful and cost-effective genomic sequencing in diverse healthcare settings., (Copyright © 2018 American Society of Human Genetics. All rights reserved.)