Search

Background and objectivesGenomic sequencing (GS) is increasingly used for diagnostic evaluation, yet follow-up care is not well understood. We assessed clinicians' recommendations after GS, parent-reported follow-up, and actions parents initiated in response to learning their child's GS results.MethodsWe surveyed parents of children who received GS through the Clinical Sequencing Evidence Generating Research consortium ∼5 to 7 months after return of results. We compared the proportion of parents who reported discussing their child's result with a clinician, clinicians' recommendations, and parents' follow-up actions by GS result type using χ2 tests.ResultsA total of 1188 respondents completed survey measures on recommended medical actions (n = 1187) and/or parent-initiated actions (n = 913). Most parents who completed recommended medical actions questions (n = 833, 70.3%) reported having discussed their child's GS results with clinicians. Clinicians made recommendations to change current care for patients with positive GS results (n = 79, 39.1%) more frequently than for those with inconclusive (n = 31, 12.4%) or negative results (n = 44, 11.9%; P < .001). Many parents discussed (n = 152 completed, n = 135 planned) implications of GS results for future pregnancies with a clinician. Aside from clinical recommendations, 13.0% (n = 119) of parents initiated changes to their child's health or lifestyle.ConclusionsIn diverse pediatric clinical contexts, GS results can lead to recommendations for follow-up care, but they likely do not prompt large increases in the quantity of care received.

Background: Digital solutions are needed to support rapid increases in the application of genetic and genomic tests (GT) in diverse clinical settings and patient populations. We developed GUÍA, a bi-lingual web-based platform that facilitates disclosure of GT results. The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial evaluated GUÍA's impact on understanding of GT results., Methods: NYCKidSeq enrolled diverse children with neurologic, cardiac, and immunologic conditions who underwent GT. Families were randomized to genetic counseling with GUÍA (intervention) or standard of care (SOC) genetic counseling for results disclosure. Parents/legal guardians (participants) completed surveys at baseline, post-results disclosure, and 6-months later. Survey measures assessed the primary study outcomes of perceived understanding of and confidence in explaining their child's GT results and the secondary outcome of objective understanding. We used regression models to evaluate the association between the intervention and the study outcomes., Results: The analysis included 551 participants, 270 in the GUÍA arm and 281 in SOC. Participants' mean age was 41.1 years and 88.6% were mothers. Most participants were Hispanic/Latino(a) (46.3%), White/European American (24.5%), or Black/African American (15.8%). Participants in the GUÍA arm had significantly higher perceived understanding post-results (OR=2.8, CI[1.004,7.617], P =0.049) and maintained higher objective understanding over time (OR=1.1, CI[1.004, 1.127], P =0.038) compared to those in the SOC arm. There was no impact on perceived confidence. Hispanic/Latino(a) individuals in the GUÍA arm maintained higher perceived understanding (OR=3.9, CI[1.6, 9.3], P =0.003), confidence (OR=2.7, CI[1.021, 7.277], P =0.046), and objective understanding (OR=1.1, CI[1.009, 1.212], P =0.032) compared to SOC ., Conclusions: This trial demonstrates that GUÍA positively impacts understanding of GT results in diverse parents of children with suspected genetic conditions. These findings build a case for utilizing GUÍA to deliver complex and often ambiguous genetic results. Continued development and evaluation of digital applications in diverse populations are critical for equitably scaling GT offerings in specialty clinics., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03738098., Competing Interests: Competing interests Dr. Kenny has received speaker honoraria from Illumina, 23&Me, Allelica, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, received research funding from Allelica, and serves as a scientific advisory board member for Encompass Biosciences, Foresite Labs, and Galateo Bio. Dr. Abul-Husn is an employee and equity holder of 23andMe; serves as a scientific advisory board member for Allelica; received personal fees from Genentech, Allelica, and 23andMe; received research funding from Akcea; and was previously employed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. All other authors declare they have no conflicts of interest to report.