Search

How individuals perceive uncertainties in sequencing results may affect their clinical utility. The purpose of this study was to explore perceptions of uncertainties in carrier results and how they relate to psychological well-being and health behavior. Post-reproductive adults (N = 462) were randomized to receive carrier results from sequencing through either a web platform or a genetic counselor. On average, participants received two results. Group differences in affective, evaluative, and clinical uncertainties were assessed from baseline to 1 and 6 months; associations with test-specific distress and communication of results were assessed at 6 months. Reductions in affective uncertainty (∆x̅ = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.53, 1.02) and evaluative uncertainty (∆x̅ = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.87) followed receipt of results regardless of randomization arm at 1 month. Participants in the web platform arm reported greater clinical uncertainty than those in the genetic counselor arm at 1 and 6 months; this was corroborated by the 1,230 questions asked of the genetic counselor and residual questions reported by those randomized to the web platform. Evaluative uncertainty was associated with a lower likelihood of communicating results to health care providers. Clinical uncertainty was associated with a lower likelihood of communicating results to children. Learning one's carrier results may reduce perceptions of uncertainties, though web-based return may lead to less reduction in clinical uncertainty in the short term. These findings warrant reinforcement of clinical implications to minimize residual questions and promote appropriate health behavior (communicating results to at-risk relatives in the case of carrier results), especially when testing alternative delivery models., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Given familial implications of genetic information, it is important to understand intentions to share carrier results with family members. To our knowledge, no studies among individuals undergoing exome sequencing have used dyadic data analysis to examine the effect of spousal perceptions and beliefs. Survey responses from 136 individuals (68 couples) undergoing exome sequencing in a research study were analyzed using dyadic analysis (the actor-partner interdependence model). Intention to share carrier results with family members was correlated between spouses (ICC = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.21-0.61; p = 0.004), as was worry about risk of a genetic condition in the family (ICC = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.24-0.62; p < 0.001). Perceived value of result and worry about risk of a genetic condition in the family were associated with one's own intentions to share carrier results. However, spousal status on these variables did not explain additional variance in an individual's intentions. Although we found no partner effects on intentions, spouses have comparable intentions to share carrier results, suggesting it may be important to account for non-independence in other research studies.

Importance: A critical bottleneck in clinical genomics is the mismatch between large volumes of results and the availability of knowledgeable professionals to return them., Objective: To test whether a web-based platform is noninferior to a genetic counselor for educating patients about their carrier results from exome sequencing., Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized noninferiority trial conducted in a longitudinal sequencing cohort at the National Institutes of Health from February 5, 2014, to December 16, 2016, was used to compare the web-based platform with a genetic counselor. Among the 571 eligible participants, 1 to 7 heterozygous variants were identified in genes that cause a phenotype that is recessively inherited. Surveys were administered after cohort enrollment, immediately following trial education, and 1 month and 6 months later to primarily healthy postreproductive participants who expressed interest in learning their carrier results. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were applied., Interventions: A web-based platform that integrated education on carrier results with personal test results was designed to directly parallel disclosure education by a genetic counselor. The sessions took a mean (SD) time of 21 (10.6), and 27 (9.3) minutes, respectively., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes and noninferiority margins (δNI) were knowledge (0 to 8, δNI = -1), test-specific distress (0 to 30, δNI = +1), and decisional conflict (15 to 75, δNI = +6)., Results: After 462 participants (80.9%) provided consent and were randomized, all but 3 participants (n = 459) completed surveys following education and counseling; 398 (86.1%) completed 1-month surveys and 392 (84.8%) completed 6-month surveys. Participants were predominantly well-educated, non-Hispanic white, married parents; mean (SD) age was 63 (63.1) years and 246 (53.6%) were men. The web platform was noninferior to the genetic counselor on outcomes assessed at 1 and 6 months: knowledge (mean group difference, -0.18; lower limit of 97.5% CI, -0.63; δNI = -1), test-specific distress (median group difference, 0; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 0; δNI = +1), and decisional conflict about choosing to learn results (mean group difference, 1.18; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 2.66; δNI = +6). There were no significant differences between the genetic counselors and web-based platform detected between modes of education delivery in disclosure rates to spouses (151 vs 159; relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.64-1.69; P > .99), children (103 vs 117; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.36; P = .59), or siblings (91 vs 78; RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.94-1.46; P = .18)., Conclusions and Relevance: This trial demonstrates noninferiority of web-based return of carrier results among postreproductive, mostly healthy adults. Replication studies among younger and more diverse populations are needed to establish generalizability. Yet return of results via a web-based platform may be sufficient for subsets of test results, reserving genetic counselors for return of results with a greater health threat., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00410241.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore the implications of sequencing information and stated preferences for return of results among research participants., Methods: Six focus groups were held with 39 ClinSeq participants. The groups included participants who had received results, those who had not, those affected with cardiovascular disease, and healthy adults. Audio recordings of the sessions were transcribed and coded and analyzed for themes., Results: All participants expressed interest in receiving results that are medically actionable, nonactionable, carrier, and less so variants that cannot be interpreted. Most participants preferred to receive results in person, although several endorsed use of Internet-based resources that they could return to. Participants identified benefits for health management along with satisfying curiosity, making scientific contributions, and partnering in research. Value was seen in gaining control over health risks. Concerns were distress and/or fear that may result. Some participants were opposed to or ambivalent about learning certain types of results, particularly those having to do with diseases that were incurable or that might have implications for the health of their children., Conclusion: There was relative enthusiasm about the value of learning sequencing information, yet it was tempered by concern about negative feeling responses and aversion to learning about incurable conditions.

Background: Massively parallel sequencing to identify rare variants is widely practiced in medical research and in the clinic. Genome and exome sequencing can identify the genetic cause of a disease (primary results), but it can also identify pathogenic variants underlying diseases that are not being sought (secondary or incidental results). A major controversy has developed surrounding the return of secondary results to research participants. We have piloted a method to analyze exomes to identify participants at risk for cardiac arrhythmias, cardiomyopathies, or sudden death., Methods and Results: Exome sequencing was performed on 870 participants not selected for arrhythmia, cardiomyopathy, or a family history of sudden death. Exome data from 22 cardiac arrhythmia- and 41 cardiomyopathy-associated genes were analyzed using an algorithm that filtered results on genotype quality, frequency, and database information. We identified 1367 variants in the cardiomyopathy genes and 360 variants in the arrhythmia genes. Six participants had pathogenic variants associated with dilated cardiomyopathy (n=1), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (n=2), left ventricular noncompaction (n=1), or long-QT syndrome (n=2). Two of these participants had evidence of cardiomyopathy and 1 had left ventricular noncompaction on echocardiogram. Three participants with likely pathogenic variants had prolonged QTc. Family history included unexplained sudden death among relatives., Conclusions: Approximately 0.5% of participants in this study had pathogenic variants in known cardiomyopathy or arrhythmia genes. This high frequency may be due to self-selection, false positives, or underestimation of the prevalence of these conditions. We conclude that clinically important cardiomyopathy and dysrhythmia secondary variants can be identified in unselected exomes.

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.

Background: Clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) is primarily used to address specific clinical concerns by detecting risk of future disease, clarifying diagnosis, or directing treatment. Additionally, CGES makes possible the disclosure of autosomal recessive and X‐linked carrier results as additional secondary findings, and research about the impact of carrier results disclosure in this context is needed. Methods: Representatives from 11 projects in the clinical sequencing exploratory research (CSER) consortium collected data from their projects using a structured survey. The survey focused on project characteristics, which variants were offered and/or disclosed to participants as carrier results, methods for carrier results disclosure, and project‐specific outcomes. We recorded quantitative responses and report descriptive statistics with the aim of describing the variability in approaches to disclosing carrier results in translational genomics research projects. Results: The proportion of participants with carrier results was related to the number of genes included, ranging from 3% (three genes) to 92% (4,600 genes). Between one and seven results were disclosed to those participants who received any positive result. Most projects offered participants choices about whether to receive some or all of the carrier results. There were a range of approaches to communicate results, and many projects used separate approaches for disclosing positive and negative results. Conclusion: Future translational genomics research projects will need to make decisions regarding whether and how to disclose carrier results. The CSER consortium experience identifies approaches that balance potential participant interest while limiting impact on project resources. The clinical sequencing exploratory research (CSER) consortium sought to understand the variability in approaches to identifying and disclosing carrier results. The broad range of experiences across 11 of the CSER projects allowed us to distill key considerations important for guiding future translational genomics research projects that will inform decisions regarding whether and how to disclose carrier results. This research may in turn help to guide policy decisions about clinical services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]