Search

As polygenic risk scores (PRS) emerge as promising tools to inform clinical care, there is a pressing need for patient-centered evidence to guide their implementation, particularly in diverse populations. Here, we conducted in-depth interviews of diverse Spanish- and English-speaking patients to explore their perspectives on clinical PRS.We enrolled 30 biobank participants aged 35-50 years through a purposive sampling strategy, ensuring that75% self-reported as African/African American or Hispanic/Latinx and half were Spanish-speaking. Semistructured interviews in Spanish or English explored attitudes toward PRS, barriers to adoption, and communication preferences. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.Perceived utility of clinical PRS focused on the potential for personal health benefits, and most participants stated that high-risk results would prompt physician consultations and health behavior changes. There was little concern among participants about the limited predictive power of PRS for non-European populations. Barriers to uptake of PRS testing and adoption of PRS-related recommendations included socioeconomic factors, insurance status, race, ethnicity, language, and inadequate understanding of PRS. Participants favored in-person PRS result disclosure by their physician.Findings provide valuable insight into diverse patients' attitudes and potential barriers related to clinical PRS, guiding future research and patient-centered clinical implementation.

Purpose Making a diagnosis from clinical genomic sequencing requires well-structured phenotypic data to guide genotype interpretation. A patient's phenotypic features can be documented using the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO), generating terms used to prioritize genes potentially causing the patient's disease. We have developed GenomeDiver to provide a user interface for clinicians that allows more effective collaboration with the clinical diagnostic laboratory, with the goal of improving the success of the diagnostic process. Methods GenomeDiver uses genomic data to prompt reverse phenotyping of patients undergoing genetic testing, enriching the amount and quality of structured phenotype data for the diagnostic laboratory, and helping clinicians to explore and flag diseases potentially causing their patient's presentation. Results We show how GenomeDiver communicates the clinician's informed insights to the diagnostic lab in the form of HPO terms for interpretation of genomic sequencing data. We describe our user-driven design process, the engineering of the software for efficiency, security and portability, and examples of the performance of GenomeDiver using genomic testing data. Conclusion GenomeDiver is a first step in a new approach to genomic diagnostics that enhances laboratory–clinician interactions, with the goal of directly engaging clinicians to improve the outcome of genomic diagnostic testing. Graphical Abstract Unlabelled Image

Objective Genomics is increasingly used for diagnostic testing in children. This study describes the expectations of parents whose child received genomic testing and whether or not they were met. Methods A diverse stratified, purposive sample of parents of 22 children in New York City was interviewed using a semi-structured guide. Genomic test results were positive, negative, or uncertain. Results Parents expressed their expectations in narrative and numeric fashion. Parents expected that their child’s test would have a direct effect on their child’s diagnosis. Some believed that results would be definitive, while others recognized testing limitations. Expectations reflected parents’ hope to find a diagnosis and led to disappointment when results were uninformative or did not impact clinical management. Conclusion Results suggest pre-test genetic counseling emphasize the low likelihood of actionable results; however, parents’ expectations of genomics’ diagnostic capabilities are strongly rooted in their need to end the diagnostic odyssey and may be difficult to manage. Practice Implications Parents’ hope for a resolution and effective treatment for their child is a powerful context in which genetic counseling is heard. Clinicians who provide genomic testing should continue to acknowledge parents’ preconceptions. Additional research in other settings will help understand how to best address and manage parent expectations of genomic medicine.

Background Pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) lead to increased risk of breast, ovarian, and other cancers, but most variant-positive individuals in the general population are unaware of their risk, and little is known about prevalence in non-European populations. We investigated BRCA1/2 prevalence and impact in the electronic health record (EHR)-linked BioMe Biobank in New York City. Methods Exome sequence data from 30,223 adult BioMe participants were evaluated for pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2. Prevalence estimates were made in population groups defined by genetic ancestry and self-report. EHR data were used to evaluate clinical characteristics of variant-positive individuals. Results There were 218 (0.7%) individuals harboring expected pathogenic variants, resulting in an overall prevalence of 1 in 139. The highest prevalence was in individuals with Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ; 1 in 49), Filipino and other Southeast Asian (1 in 81), and non-AJ European (1 in 103) ancestry. Among 218 variant-positive individuals, 112 (51.4%) harbored known founder variants: 80 had AJ founder variants (BRCA1 c.5266dupC and c.68_69delAG, and BRCA2 c.5946delT), 8 had a Puerto Rican founder variant (BRCA2 c.3922G>T), and 24 had one of 19 other founder variants. Non-European populations were more likely to harbor BRCA1/2 variants that were not classified in ClinVar or that had uncertain or conflicting evidence for pathogenicity (uncertain/conflicting). Within mixed ancestry populations, such as Hispanic/Latinos with genetic ancestry from Africa, Europe, and the Americas, there was a strong correlation between the proportion of African genetic ancestry and the likelihood of harboring an uncertain/conflicting variant. Approximately 28% of variant-positive individuals had a personal history, and 45% had a personal or family history of BRCA1/2-associated cancers. Approximately 27% of variant-positive individuals had prior clinical genetic testing for BRCA1/2. However, individuals with AJ founder variants were twice as likely to have had a clinical test (39%) than those with other pathogenic variants (20%). Conclusions These findings deepen our knowledge about BRCA1/2 variants and associated cancer risk in diverse populations, indicate a gap in knowledge about potential cancer-related variants in non-European populations, and suggest that genomic screening in diverse patient populations may be an effective tool to identify at-risk individuals.

Increasingly, genomics is informing clinical practice, but challenges remain for medical professionals lacking genetics expertise, and in access to and clinical utility of genomic testing for minority and underrepresented populations. The latter is a particularly pernicious problem due to the historical lack of inclusion of racially and ethnically diverse populations in genomic research and genomic medicine. A further challenge is the rapidly changing landscape of genetic tests and considerations of cost, interpretation, and diagnostic yield for emerging modalities like whole-genome sequencing.The NYCKidSeq project is a randomized controlled trial recruiting 1130 children and young adults predominantly from Harlem and the Bronx with suspected genetic disorders in three disease categories: neurologic, cardiovascular, and immunologic. Two clinical genetic tests will be performed for each participant, either proband, duo, or trio whole-genome sequencing (depending on sample availability) and proband targeted gene panels. Clinical utility, cost, and diagnostic yield of both testing modalities will be assessed. This study will evaluate the use of a novel, digital platform (GUÍA) to digitize the return of genomic results experience and improve participant understanding for English- and Spanish-speaking families. Surveys will collect data at three study visits: baseline (0 months), result disclosure visit (ROR1, + 3 months), and follow-up visit (ROR2, + 9 months). Outcomes will assess parental understanding of and attitudes toward receiving genomic results for their child and behavioral, psychological, and social impact of results. We will also conduct a pilot study to assess a digital tool called GenomeDiver designed to enhance communication between clinicians and genetic testing labs. We will evaluate GenomeDiver's ability to increase the diagnostic yield compared to standard practices, improve clinician's ability to perform targeted reverse phenotyping, and increase the efficiency of genetic testing lab personnel.The NYCKidSeq project will contribute to the innovations and best practices in communicating genomic test results to diverse populations. This work will inform strategies for implementing genomic medicine in health systems serving diverse populations using methods that are clinically useful, technologically savvy, culturally sensitive, and ethically sound.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03738098 . Registered on November 13, 2018 Trial Sponsor: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Contact Name: Eimear Kenny, PhD (Principal Investigator) Address: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Pl., Box 1003, New York, NY 10029 Email: eimear.kenny@mssm.edu.

The descriptor 'usual care' refers to standard or routine care. Yet, no formal definition exists. The need to define what constitutes usual care arises in clinical research. Often one arm in a trial represents usual care in comparison with a novel intervention. Accordingly, usual care in genetic counseling research appears predominantly in randomized controlled trials. Recent standards for reporting genetic counseling research call for standardization, but do not address usual care. We (1) inventoried all seven studies in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Consortium (CSER) about how genetic counseling was conceptualized, conducted, and whether a usual care arm was involved; (2) conducted a review of published randomized control trials in genetic counseling, comparing how researchers describe usual care groups; and (3) reviewed existing professionally endorsed definitions and practice descriptions of genetic counseling. We found wide variation in the content and delivery of usual care. Descriptions frequently detailed the content of usual care, most often noting assessment of genetic risk factors, collecting family histories, and offering testing. A minority included addressing psychological concerns or the risks versus benefits of testing. Descriptions of how care was delivered were vague except for mode and type of clinician, which varied. This significant variation, beyond differences expected among subspecialties, reduces the validity and generalizability of genetic counseling research. Ideally, research reflects clinical practice so that evidence generated can be used to improve clinical outcomes. To address this objective, we propose a definition of usual care in genetic counseling research that merges common elements from the National Society of Genetic Counselors' practice definition, the Reciprocal Engagement Model, and the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counselors' practice-based competencies. Promoting consistent execution of usual care in the design of genetic counseling trials can lead to more consistency in representing clinical care and facilitate the generation of evidence to improve it.

Achieving confidence in the causality of a disease locus is a complex task that often requires supporting data from both statistical genetics and clinical genomics. Here we describe a combined approach to identify and characterize a genetic disorder that leverages distantly related patients in a health system and population-scale mapping. We utilize genomic data to uncover components of distant pedigrees, in the absence of recorded pedigree information, in the multi-ethnic BioMe biobank in New York City. By linking to medical records, we discover a locus associated with both elevated genetic relatedness and extreme short stature. We link the gene, COL27A1, with a little-known genetic disease, previously thought to be rare and recessive. We demonstrate that disease manifests in both heterozygotes and homozygotes, indicating a common collagen disorder impacting up to 2% of individuals of Puerto Rican ancestry, leading to a better understanding of the continuum of complex and Mendelian disease., eLife digest Diseases often run in families. These disease are frequently linked to changes in DNA that are passed down through generations. Close family members may share these disease-causing mutations; so may distant relatives who inherited the same mutation from a common ancestor long ago. Geneticists use a method called linkage mapping to trace a disease found in multiple members of a family over generations to genetic changes in a shared ancestor. This allows scientists to pinpoint the exact place in the genome the disease-causing mutation occurred. Using computer algorithms, scientists can apply the same technique to identify mutations that distant relatives inherited from a common ancestor. Belbin et al. used this computational technique to identify a mutation that may cause unusually short stature or bone and joint problems in up to 2% of people of Puerto Rican descent. In the experiments, the genomes of about 32,000 New Yorkers who have volunteered to participate in the BioMe Biobank and their health records were used to search for genetic changes linked to extremely short stature. The search revealed that people who inherited two copies of this mutation from their parents were likely to be extremely short or to have bone and joint problems. People who inherited one copy had an increased likelihood of joint or bone problems. This mutation affects a gene responsible for making a form of protein called collagen that is important for bone growth. The analysis suggests the mutation first arose in a Native American ancestor living in Puerto Rico around the time that European colonization began. The mutation had previously been linked to a disorder called Steel syndrome that was thought to be rare. Belbin et al. showed this condition is actually fairly common in people whose ancestors recently came from Puerto Rico, but may often go undiagnosed by their physicians. The experiments emphasize the importance of including diverse populations in genetic studies, as studies of people of predominantly European descent would likely have missed the link between this disease and mutation.

Patients, clinicians, researchers and payers are seeking to understand the value of using genomic information (as reflected by genotyping, sequencing, family history or other data) to inform clinical decision-making. However, challenges exist to widespread clinical implementation of genomic medicine, a prerequisite for developing evidence of its real-world utility. To address these challenges, the National Institutes of Health-funded IGNITE (Implementing GeNomics In pracTicE; www.ignite-genomics.org ) Network, comprised of six projects and a coordinating center, was established in 2013 to support the development, investigation and dissemination of genomic medicine practice models that seamlessly integrate genomic data into the electronic health record and that deploy tools for point of care decision making. IGNITE site projects are aligned in their purpose of testing these models, but individual projects vary in scope and design, including exploring genetic markers for disease risk prediction and prevention, developing tools for using family history data, incorporating pharmacogenomic data into clinical care, refining disease diagnosis using sequence-based mutation discovery, and creating novel educational approaches. This paper describes the IGNITE Network and member projects, including network structure, collaborative initiatives, clinical decision support strategies, methods for return of genomic test results, and educational initiatives for patients and providers. Clinical and outcomes data from individual sites and network-wide projects are anticipated to begin being published over the next few years. The IGNITE Network is an innovative series of projects and pilot demonstrations aiming to enhance translation of validated actionable genomic information into clinical settings and develop and use measures of outcome in response to genome-based clinical interventions using a pragmatic framework to provide early data and proofs of concept on the utility of these interventions. Through these efforts and collaboration with other stakeholders, IGNITE is poised to have a significant impact on the acceleration of genomic information into medical practice.