Search

Genetic counseling for patients who are pursuing genetic testing in the absence of a medical indication, referred to as elective genomic testing (EGT), is becoming more common. This type of testing has the potential to detect genetic conditions before there is a significant health impact permitting earlier management and/or treatment. Pre- and post-test counseling for EGT is similar to indication-based genetic testing. Both require a complete family and medical history when ordering a test or interpreting a result. However, EGT counseling has some special considerations including greater uncertainties around penetrance and clinical utility and a lack of published guidelines. While certain considerations in the selection of a high-quality genetic testing laboratory are universal, there are some considerations that are unique to the selection of a laboratory performing EGT. This practice resource intends to provide guidance for genetic counselors and other healthcare providers caring for adults seeking pre- or post-test counseling for EGT. Genetic counselors and other genetics trained healthcare providers are the ideal medical professionals to supply accurate information to individuals seeking counseling about EGT enabling them to make informed decisions about testing and follow-up.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing for pediatric cancer predisposition syndromes (CPS) could augment newborn screening programs, but with uncertain benefits and costs. METHODS: We developed a simulation model to evaluate universal screening for a CPS panel. Cohorts of US newborns were simulated under universal screening vs. usual care. Using data from clinical studies, ClinVar and gnomAD, the presence of pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in RET, RB1, TP53, DICER1, SUFU, PTCH1, SMARCB1, WT1, APC, ALK, PHO2XB were assigned at birth. Newborns with identified variants underwent guideline surveillance. Survival benefit was modeled via reductions in advanced disease, cancer deaths, and treatment-related late-mortality, assuming 100% adherence. RESULTS: Among 3.7 million newborns, under usual care, 1803 developed a CPS malignancy before age 20. With universal screening, 13.3% were identified at birth as at-risk due to P/LP variant detection and underwent surveillance, resulting in a 53.5% decrease in cancer deaths in P/LP heterozygotes and a 7.8% decrease among the entire cohort before age 20. Given a test cost of $55, universal screening cost $244,860 per life-year-gained; with a $20 test, the cost fell to $99,430 per life-year-gained. CONCLUSION: Population-based genetic testing of newborns may reduce mortality associated with pediatric cancers and could be cost-effective as sequencing costs decline.

We investigated the awareness, perceived usefulness, and use of genetic testing among Hispanic and Latino individuals. Annual follow-up surveys for the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL) from 2019 to April 2020 assessed participants' level of awareness and use of genetic tests to determine disease risks, likelihood of passing disease to children, disease treatment, or drug selection. They also were asked to rate the usefulness of the tests for managing a person's health on a 1 (not at all useful) to 10 (extremely useful) scale. There were 5,769 HCHS/SOL participants who completed at least one survey question. Of the target population, 55.2% was aware of at least one type of genetic test. Awareness varied between HCHS/SOL enrollment sites and was higher among individuals who had higher educational attainment and had higher incomes. Only 3.3% of the target population reported receiving one or more of the tests described. HCHS/SOL individuals rated the usefulness as 8.4, on average, with lower scores observed among U.S.-born individuals compared to individuals born outside the United States, with differences by HCHS/SOL enrollment sites. In conclusion, while awareness of genetic testing among Hispanic and Latino individuals varies by location, education, and income, perceptions about its usefulness are high while experiences with testing are rare. Results identify groups and locations that may benefit from greater outreach about the capabilities of genetic testing and precision medicine.

Most professional guidelines recommend against genetic screening for adult-onset only conditions until adulthood, yet others argue there may be benefit to disclosing such results. We explored parents' decision-making on this issue in the BabySeq Project, a clinical trial of newborn genomic sequencing.We conducted interviews with parents (n=24) who were given the option to receive actionable adult-onset only results for their children. Interviews explored parents' motivations to receive and reasons to decline adult-onset only genetic disease risk information, their decision-making process, and their suggestions for supporting parents in making this decision.Parents noted several motivations to receive and reasons to decline adult-onset only results. Most commonly, parents cited early intervention/surveillance (n=11), implications for family heath (n=7), and the ability to prepare (n=6) as motivations to receive these results. The most common reasons to decline were protection of the child's future autonomy (n=4), negative impact on parenting (n=3), and anxiety about future disease (n=3). Parents identified a number of ways to support parents in making this decision.Results demonstrate considerations to better support parental decision-making that aligns with their values when offering adult-onset only genetic information as it is more commonly integrated into pediatric clinical care.

PURPOSE The use of genomic sequencing (GS) in military settings poses unique considerations, including the potential for GS to impact service members' careers. The MilSeq Project investigated the use of GS in clinical care of active duty Airmen in the United States Air Force (USAF). METHODS We assessed perceived risks, benefits, and attitudes toward use of GS in the USAF among patient participants (n = 93) and health-care provider participants (HCPs) (n = 12) prior to receiving or disclosing GS results. RESULTS Participants agreed that there are health benefits associated with GS (90% patients, 75% HCPs), though more HCPs (75%) than patients (40%) agreed that there are risks (p = 0.048). The majority of both groups (67% HCPs, 77% patients) agreed that they trust the USAF with genetic information, but far fewer agreed that genetic information should be used to make decisions about deployment (5% patients, 17% HCPs) or duty assignments (3% patients, 17% HCPs). Despite their hesitancy, patients were supportive of the USAF testing for nondisease traits that could impact their duty performance. Eighty-seven percent of patients did not think their GS results would influence their career. CONCLUSION Results suggest favorable attitudes toward the use of GS in the USAF when not used for deployment or assignment decisions.

IMPORTANCE: Knowledge about the spectrum of diseases associated with hereditary cancer syndromes may improve disease diagnosis and management for patients and help to identify high-risk individuals. OBJECTIVE: To identify phenotypes associated with hereditary cancer genes through a phenome-wide association study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phenome-wide association study used health data from participants in 3 cohorts. The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics Sequencing (eMERGEseq) data set recruited predominantly healthy individuals from 10 US medical centers from July 16, 2016, through February 18, 2018, with a mean follow-up through electronic health records (EHRs) of 12.7 (7.4) years. The UK Biobank (UKB) cohort recruited participants from March 15, 2006, through August 1, 2010, with a mean (SD) follow-up of 12.4 (1.0) years. The Hereditary Cancer Registry (HCR) recruited patients undergoing clinical genetic testing at Vanderbilt University Medical Center from May 1, 2012, through December 31, 2019, with a mean (SD) follow-up through EHRs of 8.8 (6.5) years. EXPOSURES: Germline variants in 23 hereditary cancer genes. Pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants for each gene were aggregated for association analyses. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Phenotypes in the eMERGEseq and HCR cohorts were derived from the linked EHRs. Phenotypes in UKB were from multiple sources of health-related data. RESULTS: A total of 214 020 participants were identified, including 23 544 in eMERGEseq cohort (mean [SD] age, 47.8 [23.7] years; 12 611 women [53.6%]), 187 234 in the UKB cohort (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [8.1] years; 104 055 [55.6%] women), and 3242 in the HCR cohort (mean [SD] age, 52.5 [15.5] years; 2851 [87.9%] women). All 38 established gene-cancer associations were replicated, and 19 new associations were identified. These included the following 7 associations with neoplasms: CHEK2 with leukemia (odds ratio [OR], 3.81 [95% CI, 2.64-5.48]) and plasma cell neoplasms (OR, 3.12 [95% CI, 1.84-5.28]), ATM with gastric cancer (OR, 4.27 [95% CI, 2.35-7.44]) and pancreatic cancer (OR, 4.44 [95% CI, 2.66-7.40]), MUTYH (biallelic) with kidney cancer (OR, 32.28 [95% CI, 6.40-162.73]), MSH6 with bladder cancer (OR, 5.63 [95% CI, 2.75-11.49]), and APC with benign liver/intrahepatic bile duct tumors (OR, 52.01 [95% CI, 14.29-189.29]). The remaining 12 associations with nonneoplastic diseases included BRCA1/2 with ovarian cysts (OR, 3.15 [95% CI, 2.22-4.46] and 3.12 [95% CI, 2.36-4.12], respectively), MEN1 with acute pancreatitis (OR, 33.45 [95% CI, 9.25-121.02]), APC with gastritis and duodenitis (OR, 4.66 [95% CI, 2.61-8.33]), and PTEN with chronic gastritis (OR, 15.68 [95% CI, 6.01-40.92]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this genetic association study analyzing the EHRs of 3 large cohorts suggest that these new phenotypes associated with hereditary cancer genes may facilitate early detection and better management of cancers. This study highlights the potential benefits of using EHR data in genomic medicine.

PURPOSE: The goal of Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Phase III Network was to return actionable sequence variants to 25,084 consenting participants from 10 different health care institutions across the United States. The purpose of this study was to evaluate system-based issues relating to the return of results (RoR) disclosure process for clinical grade research genomic tests to eMERGE3 participants. METHODS: RoR processes were developed and approved by each eMERGE institution’s internal review board. Investigators at each eMERGE3 site were surveyed for RoR processes related to the participant’s disclosure of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants and engagement with genetic counseling. Standard statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 25,084 eMERGE participants, 1444 had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant identified on the eMERGEseq panel of 67 genes and 14 single nucleotide variants. Of these, 1077 (74.6%) participants had results disclosed, with 562 (38.9%) participants provided with variant-specific genetic counseling. Site-specific processes that either offered or required genetic counseling in their RoR process had an effect on whether a participant ultimately engaged with genetic counseling (P = .0052). CONCLUSION: The real-life experience of the multiarm eMERGE3 RoR study for returning actionable genomic results to consented research participants showed the impact of consent, method of disclosure, and genetic counseling on RoR.

Importance Newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) may provide health benefits throughout the life span, but there are concerns that it could also have an unfavorable (ie, negative) psychosocial effect on families. Objective To assess the psychosocial effect of nGS on families from the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of nGS on the clinical care of newborns from well-baby nurseries and intensive care units. Design, Setting, and Participants In this randomized clinical trial conducted from May 14, 2015, to May 21, 2019, at well-baby nurseries and intensive care units at 3 Boston, Massachusetts, area hospitals, 519 parents of 325 infants completed surveys at enrollment, immediately after disclosure of nGS results, and 3 and 10 months after results disclosure. Statistical analysis was performed on a per-protocol basis from January 16, 2019, to December 1, 2019. Intervention Newborns were randomized to receive either standard newborn screening and a family history report (control group) or the same plus an nGS report of childhood-onset conditions and highly actionable adult-onset conditions (nGS group). Main Outcomes and Measures Mean responses were compared between groups and, within the nGS group, between parents of children who received a monogenic disease risk finding and those who did not in 3 domains of psychosocial impact: parent-child relationship (Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale), parents’ relationship (Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale), and parents’ psychological distress (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale). Results A total of 519 parents (275 women [53.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [4.5] years) were included in this study. Although mean scores differed for some outcomes at singular time points, generalized estimating equations models did not show meaningful differences in parent-child relationship (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale scores: postdisclosure, 0.04 [0.15]; 3 months, –0.18 [0.18]; 10 months, –0.07 [0.20]; jointP = .57) or parents’ psychological distress (between-group ratio of adjusted mean [SE] Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores: postdisclosure, 1.04 [0.08]; 3 months, 1.07 [0.11]; jointP = .80) response patterns between study groups over time for any measures analyzed in these 2 domains. Response patterns on one parents’ relationship measure differed between groups over time (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale scores: postdisclosure, –0.19 [0.07]; 3 months, –0.04 [0.07]; and 10 months, –0.01 [0.08]; jointP = .02), but the effect decreased over time and no difference was observed on the conflict measure responses over time. We found no evidence of persistent negative psychosocial effect in any domain. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial of nGS, there was no persistent negative psychosocial effect on families among those who received nGS nor among those who received a monogenic disease risk finding for their infant. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT02422511

Summary 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.

The advancement of precision medicine requires new methods to coordinate and deliver genetic data from heterogeneous sources to physicians and patients. The eMERGE III Network enrolled >25,000 participants from biobank and prospective cohorts of predominantly healthy individuals for clinical genetic testing to determine clinically actionable findings. The network developed protocols linking together the 11 participant collection sites and 2 clinical genetic testing laboratories. DNA capture panels targeting 109 genes were used for testing of DNA and sample collection, data generation, interpretation, reporting, delivery, and storage were each harmonized. A compliant and secure network enabled ongoing review and reconciliation of clinical interpretations, while maintaining communication and data sharing between clinicians and investigators. A total of 202 individuals had positive diagnostic findings relevant to the indication for testing and 1,294 had additional/secondary findings of medical significance deemed to be returnable, establishing data return rates for other testing endeavors. This study accomplished integration of structured genomic results into multiple electronic health record (EHR) systems, setting the stage for clinical decision support to enable genomic medicine. Further, the established processes enable different sequencing sites to harmonize technical and interpretive aspects of sequencing tests, a critical achievement toward global standardization of genomic testing. The eMERGE protocols and tools are available for widespread dissemination.

BACKGROUND: Although P1 and Xg(a) are known to be associated with the A4GALT and XG genes respectively, the genetic basis of antigen expression has been elusive. Recent reports link both P1 and Xg(a) expression with nucleotide changes in the promotor regions and with antigen negative phenotypes due to disruption of transcription factor binding. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Whole genome sequencing was performed on 113 individuals as part of the MedSeq Project with serologic RBC antigen typing for P1 (n=77) and Xg(a) (n=15). Genomic data were analyzed by two approaches, nucleotide frequency correlation or serologic correlation, to find A4GALT and XG changes associated with P1 and Xg(a) expression. RESULTS: For P1, the frequency approach identified 29 possible associated nucleotide changes, and the serologic approach revealed four among them correlating with the P1+/P1− phenotype: chr22:43,115,523_43,115,520AAAG/delAAAG (rs66781836); chr 22:43,114,551C/T (rs8138197); chr22:43,114,020T/G (rs2143918); and chr22:43,113,793G/T (rs5751348). For Xg(a), the frequency approach identified 82 possible associated nucleotide changes, and among these the serologic approach revealed one correlating with the Xg(a+)/Xg(a–) phenotype: chrX:2,666,384G/C (rs311103). CONCLUSION: A bioinformatics analysis pipeline was created to identify genetic changes responsible for RBC antigen expression. This study, in progress prior to the recently published reports, independently confirms the basis for P1 and Xg(a). Although, this enabled molecular typing of these antigens, the Y chromosome PAR1 region interfered with Xg(a) typing in males. This approach could be used to identify and confirm the genetic basis of antigens, potentially replacing the historical approach using family pedigrees as genomic sequencing becomes common place.

A challenge in returning genomic test results to research participants is how best to communicate complex and clinically nuanced findings to participants in a manner that is scalable to the large numbers of participants enrolled. The purpose of this study was to examine the features of genetic results letters produced at each Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE3) Network site to assess their readability and content. Letters were collected from each site, and a qualitative analysis of letter content and a quantitative analysis of readability statistics were performed. Because letters were produced independently at each eMERGE site, significant heterogeneity in readability and content was found. The content of letters varied widely from a baseline of notifying participants that results existed to more detailed information about positive or negative results, as well as materials for sharing with family members. Most letters were significantly above the Centers for Disease Control-suggested reading level for health communication. While continued effort should be applied to make letters easier to understand, the ongoing challenge of explaining complex genomic information, the implications of negative test results, and the uncertainty that comes with some types of test and result makes simplifying letter text challenging.

Summary Background There are more than 300 known red blood cell (RBC) antigens and 33 platelet antigens that differ between individuals. Sensitisation to antigens is a serious complication that can occur in prenatal medicine and after blood transfusion, particularly for patients who require multiple transfusions. Although pre-transfusion compatibility testing largely relies on serological methods, reagents are not available for many antigens. Methods based on single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays have been used, but typing for ABO and Rh—the most important blood groups—cannot be done with SNP typing alone. We aimed to develop a novel method based on whole-genome sequencing to identify RBC and platelet antigens. Methods This whole-genome sequencing study is a subanalysis of data from patients in the whole-genome sequencing arm of the MedSeq Project randomised controlled trial (NCT01736566) with no measured patient outcomes. We created a database of molecular changes in RBC and platelet antigens and developed an automated antigen-typing algorithm based on whole-genome sequencing (bloodTyper). This algorithm was iteratively improved to address cis–trans haplotype ambiguities and homologous gene alignments. Whole-genome sequencing data from 110 MedSeq participants (30 × depth) were used to initially validate bloodTyper through comparison with conventional serology and SNP methods for typing of 38 RBC antigens in 12 blood-group systems and 22 human platelet antigens. bloodTyper was further validated with whole-genome sequencing data from 200 INTERVAL trial participants (15 × depth) with serological comparisons. Findings We iteratively improved bloodTyper by comparing its typing results with conventional serological and SNP typing in three rounds of testing. The initial whole-genome sequencing typing algorithm was 99·5% concordant across the first 20 MedSeq genomes. Addressing discordances led to development of an improved algorithm that was 99·8% concordant for the remaining 90 MedSeq genomes. Additional modifications led to the final algorithm, which was 99·2% concordant across 200 INTERVAL genomes (or 99·9% after adjustment for the lower depth of coverage). Interpretation By enabling more precise antigen-matching of patients with blood donors, antigen typing based on whole-genome sequencing provides a novel approach to improve transfusion outcomes with the potential to transform the practice of transfusion medicine. Funding National Human Genome Research Institute, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, National Health Service Blood and Transplant, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellcome Trust.

A goal of the 3rd phase of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE3) Network was to examine the return of results (RoR) of actionable variants in more than 100 genes to consenting participants and their healthcare providers. Each of the 10 eMERGE sites developed plans for three essential elements of the RoR process: Disclosure to the participant, notification of the health care provider, and integration of results into the electronic health record (EHR). Procedures and protocols around these three elements were adapted as appropriate to individual site requirements and limitations. Detailed information about the RoR procedures at each site was obtained through structured telephone interviews and follow-up surveys with the clinical investigator leading or participating in the RoR process at each eMERGE3 institution. Because RoR processes at each of the 10 sites allowed for taking into account differences in population, disease focus and institutional requirements, significant heterogeneity of process was identified, including variability in the order in which patients and clinicians were notified and results were placed in the EHR. This heterogeneity in the process flow for eMERGE3 RoR reflects the &ldquo, real world&rdquo, of genomic medicine in which RoR procedures must be shaped by the needs of the patients and institutional environments.

© 2018, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Purpose: Clinical sequencing emerging in health care may result in secondary findings (SFs). Methods: Seventy-four of 6240 (1.2%) participants who underwent genome or exome sequencing through the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium received one or more SFs from the original American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended 56 gene–condition pair list; we assessed clinical and psychosocial actions. Results: The overall adjusted prevalence of SFs in the ACMG 56 genes across the CSER consortium was 1.7%. Initially 32% of the family histories were positive, and post disclosure, this increased to 48%. The average cost of follow-up medical actions per finding up to a 1-year period was $128 (observed, range: $0–$678) and $421 (recommended, range: $141–$1114). Case reports revealed variability in the frequency of and follow-up on medical recommendations patients received associated with each SF gene–condition pair. Participants did not report adverse psychosocial impact associated with receiving SFs; this was corroborated by 18 participant (or parent) interviews. All interviewed participants shared findings with relatives and reported that relatives did not pursue additional testing or care. Conclusion: Our results suggest that disclosure of SFs shows little to no adverse impact on participants and adds only modestly to near-term health-care costs; additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Clinical and research settings are increasingly incorporating genomic sequencing (GS) technologies. Previous research has explored reasons for declining genetic testing and participation in genetic studies; however, there is a dearth of literature regarding why potential participants decline participation in GS research, and if any of these reasons are unique to GS. This knowledge is essential to promote informed decision-making and identify potential barriers to research participation and clinical implementation. We aggregated data from seven sites across the National Institutes of Health's Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium on each project's procedures for recruitment, and rates of and reasons for decline. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The decline rate for enrollment at the seven CSER sites ranged from 12 to 64% (median 28%) and varied based on age and disease status. Projects differed in their protocols for approaching potential participants and obtaining informed consent. Reasons for declining GS research were reported for 1088 potential participants. Commonly cited reasons were similar to those reported for clinical single gene testing and non-GS genetic research. The most frequently cited reason for decline was study logistics (35%); thus, addressing logistical barriers to enrollment may positively impact GS study recruitment. Privacy and discrimination concerns were cited by 13% of decliners, highlighting the need for researchers and providers to focus educational efforts in this area. The potential psychological burden of pursuing and receiving results from GS and not wanting to receive secondary findings, a concern specific to GS, have been cited as concerns in the literature. A minority of potential participants cited psychological impact (8%) or not wanting to receive secondary findings (2%) as reasons for decline, suggesting that these concerns were not major barriers to participation in these GS studies. Further research is necessary to explore the impact, if any, of different participant groups or study protocols on rates of decline for GS studies. Future studies exploring GS implementation should consider using standardized collection methods to examine reasons for decline in larger populations and more diverse healthcare settings.

Background— As DNA sequencing costs decline, genetic testing options have expanded. Whole exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing (WGS) are entering clinical use, posing questions about their incremental value compared with disease-specific multigene panels that have been the cornerstone of genetic testing. Methods and Results— Forty-one patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who had undergone targeted hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genetic testing (either multigene panel or familial variant test) were recruited into the MedSeq Project, a clinical trial of WGS. Results from panel genetic testing and WGS were compared. In 20 of 41 participants, panel genetic testing identified variants classified as pathogenic, likely pathogenic, or uncertain significance. WGS identified 19 of these 20 variants, but the variant detection algorithm missed a pathogenic 18 bp duplication in myosin binding protein C ( MYBPC3 ) because of low coverage. In 3 individuals, WGS identified variants in genes implicated in cardiomyopathy but not included in prior panel testing: a pathogenic protein tyrosine phosphatase, non-receptor type 11 ( PTPN11 ) variant and variants of uncertain significance in integrin-linked kinase ( ILK ) and filamin-C ( FLNC ). WGS also identified 84 secondary findings (mean=2 per person, range=0–6), which mostly defined carrier status for recessive conditions. Conclusions— WGS detected nearly all variants identified on panel testing, provided 1 new diagnostic finding, and allowed interrogation of posited disease genes. Several variants of uncertain clinical use and numerous secondary genetic findings were also identified. Whereas panel testing and WGS provided similar diagnostic yield, WGS offers the advantage of reanalysis over time to incorporate advances in knowledge, but requires expertise in genomic interpretation to appropriately incorporate WGS into clinical care. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01736566.

PurposeGreat uncertainty exists about the costs associated with whole-genome sequencing (WGS).MethodsOne hundred cardiology patients with cardiomyopathy diagnoses and 100 ostensibly healthy primary care patients were randomized to receive a family-history report alone or with a WGS report. Cardiology patients also reviewed prior genetic test results. WGS costs were estimated by tracking resource use and staff time. Downstream costs were estimated by identifying services in administrative data, medical records, and patient surveys for 6 months.ResultsThe incremental cost per patient of WGS testing was $5,098 in cardiology settings and $5,073 in primary care settings compared with family history alone. Mean 6-month downstream costs did not differ statistically between the control and WGS arms in either setting (cardiology: difference = -$1,560, 95% confidence interval -$7,558 to $3,866, p = 0.36; primary care: difference = $681, 95% confidence interval -$884 to $2,171, p = 0.70). Scenario analyses showed the cost reduction of omitting or limiting the types of secondary findings was less than $69 and $182 per patient in cardiology and primary care, respectively.ConclusionShort-term costs of WGS were driven by the costs of sequencing and interpretation rather than downstream health care. Disclosing additional types of secondary findings has a limited cost impact following disclosure.

Genomic sequencing technology is increasingly used in genetic research. Studies of informed consent for exome and genome sequencing (ES/GS) research have largely involved hypothetical scenarios or healthy individuals enrolling in population-based studies. Studies have yet to explore the consent experiences of adults with inherited disease. We conducted a qualitative interview study of 15 adults recently enrolled in a large-scale ES/GS study (11 affected adults, four parents of affected children). Our study had two goals: (1) to explore three theoretical barriers to consent for ES/GS research (interpretive/technical complexity, possibility of incidental findings, and risks of loss of privacy); and (2) to explore how interviewees experienced the consent process. Interviewees could articulate study goals and processes, describe incidental findings, discuss risks of privacy loss, and reflect on their consent experience. Few expected the study would identify the genetic cause of their condition. All elected to receive incidental findings. Interviewees acknowledged paying little attention to potential implications of incidental findings in light of more pressing goals of supporting research regarding their own medical conditions. Interviewees suggested that experience living with a genetic condition prepared them to adjust to incidental findings. Interviewees also expressed little concern about loss of confidentiality of study data. Some experienced the consent process as very long. None desired reconsent prior to return of study results. Families with inherited disease likely would benefit from a consent process in which study risks and benefits were discussed in the context of prior experiences with genetic research and genetic disease.

Newborn screening (NBS) is a minimally invasive lifesaving test. There is currently no federal mandate for NBS, thus states determine their own screening panel based on the recommendations of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborn and Children (SACHDNC), which was recently re-chartered as the Discretionary Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (DACHDNC). After NBS is completed, a couple of residual blood spots remain. While some states allow these spots to be used for public health and scientific research purposes, parents are not always informed about these additional uses. This paper addresses the National Society of Genetic Counselors' (NSGC's) position about NBS and blood spot storage/use and the rationale for these positions. The National Society of Genetic Counselors strongly supports newborn screening for the uniform screening panel of conditions recommended by the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children. NSGC also supports storage and use of blood spot samples by newborn screening laboratories and transparent policies that govern these activities.

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.

The clinical value of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in asymptomatic adults is uncertain. This pilot trial describes the effects on care of adding WGS to standardized family history assessment in pr...