Search

Obtaining adequate DNA for long-read genome sequencing remains a roadblock to producing contiguous genomes from small-bodied organisms, hindering understanding of phylogenetic relationships and genome evolution. Multiple displacement amplification leverages Phi29 DNA polymerase to produce micrograms of DNA from picograms of input. However, multiple displacement amplification's inherent biases in amplification related to guanine and cytosine (GC) content, repeat content and chimera production are a problem for long-read genome assembly, which has been little investigated. We explored the utility of multiple displacement amplification for generating template DNA for High Fidelity (HiFi) sequencing directly from living cells of Caenorhabditis elegans (Nematoda) and Lepidodermella squamata (Gastrotricha) containing one order of magnitude less DNA than required for the PacBio Ultra-Low DNA Input Workflow. High Fidelity sequencing of libraries prepared from multiple displacement amplification products resulted in highly contiguous and complete genomes for both C. elegans (102 Mbp assembly; 336 contigs; N50 = 868 kbp; L50 = 39; BUSCO_nematoda_nucleotide: S:96.1%, D:2.8%) and L. squamata (122 Mbp assembly; 157 contigs; N50 = 3.9 Mbp; L50 = 13; BUSCO_metazoa_nucleotide: S:80.8%, D:2.8%). Coverage uniformity for reads from multiple displacement amplification DNA (Gini Index: 0.14, normalized mean across all 100 kbp blocks: 0.49) and reads from pooled nematode DNA (Gini Index: 0.16, normalized mean across all 100 kbp blocks: 0.49) proved similar. Using this approach, we sequenced the genome of the microscopic invertebrate L. squamata (Gastrotricha), the first of its phylum. Using the newly sequenced genome, we infer Gastrotricha's long-debated phylogenetic position as the sister taxon of Platyhelminthes and conduct a comparative analysis of the Hox cluster., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution.)

Purpose: The ClinGen Actionability Working Group (AWG) developed an evidence-based framework to generate actionability reports and scores of gene-condition pairs in the context of secondary findings from genome sequencing. Here we describe the expansion of the framework to include actionability assertions., Methods: Initial development of the actionability rubric was based on previously scored adult gene-condition pairs and individual expert evaluation. Rubric refinement was iterative and based on evaluation, feedback, and discussion. The final rubric was pragmatically evaluated via integration into actionability assessments for 27 gene-condition pairs., Results: The resulting rubric has a 4-point scale (limited, moderate, strong, and definitive) and uses the highest-scoring outcome-intervention pair of each gene-condition pair to generate a preliminary assertion. During AWG discussions, predefined criteria and factors guide discussion to produce a consensus assertion for a gene-condition pair, which may differ from the preliminary assertion. The AWG has retrospectively generated assertions for all previously scored gene-condition pairs and are prospectively asserting on gene-condition pairs under assessment, having completed over 170 adult and 188 pediatric gene-condition pairs., Conclusion: The AWG expanded its framework to provide actionability assertions to enhance the clinical value of their resources and increase their utility as decision aids regarding return of secondary findings., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest A. Buchanan has equity in MeTree and You, Inc. S. Rego is an employee and has options at BillionToOne, Inc. Dr Steiner is an employee with equity of PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences, and reports consulting fees from Leadiant, Mirum, and PTC Therapeutics. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A person's phenotypic sex (i.e., endogenous expression of primary, secondary, and endocrinological sex characteristics) can impact crucial aspects of genetic assessment and resulting clinical care recommendations. In studies with genetics components, it is critical to collect phenotypic sex, information about current organ/tissue inventory and hormonal milieu, and gender identity. If researchers do not carefully construct data models, transgender, gender diverse, and sex diverse (TGSD) individuals may be given inappropriate care recommendations and/or be subjected to misgendering, inflicting medical and psychosocial harms. The recognized need for an inclusive care experience should not be limited to clinical practice but should extend to the research setting, where researchers must build an inclusive experience for TGSD participants. Here, we review three TGSD participants in the Family History and Cancer Risk Study (FOREST) to critically evaluate sex- and gender-related survey measures and associated data models in a study seeking to identify patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes. Furthermore, we leverage these participants' responses to sex- and gender identity-related questions in FOREST to inform needed changes to the FOREST data model and to make recommendations for TGSD-inclusive genetics research design, data models, and processes., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Genetic Counseling published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Scalable models for result disclosure are needed to ensure large-scale access to genomics services. Research evaluating alternatives to genetic counseling suggests effectiveness; however, it is unknown whether these findings are generalizable across populations. We assessed whether a letter is non-inferior to telephone genetic counseling to inform participants with no personal or family history of cancer of their normal results. Data were collected via self-report surveys before and after result disclosure (at 1 and 6 months) in a study sample enriched for individuals from underserved populations. Primary outcomes were subjective understanding of results (global and aggregated) and test-related feelings, ascertained via three subscales (uncertainty, negative emotions, and positive feelings) of the Feelings About genomiC Testing Results (FACToR) measure. Secondary outcomes related to satisfaction with communication. Non-inferiority tests compared outcomes among disclosure methods. Communication by letter was inferior in terms of global subjective understanding of results (at 1 month) and non-inferior to telephoned results (at 6 months). Letter was non-inferior to telephone for aggregated understanding (at 6 months). Letter was superior (at 1 month) to telephone on the uncertainty FACToR subscale. Letter was non-inferior to telephone on the positive-feelings FACToR subscale (at 6 months). Letter was non-inferior to telephone for satisfaction with mode of result delivery and genetic test results. Communication via letter was inferior to telephone in communicating the "right amount of information." The use of written communication to relay normal results to low-risk individuals is a promising strategy that may improve the efficiency of care delivery., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: We developed an electronic patient-facing family history collection tool including B-RST 3.0, PREMM 5 risk assessments and "limited family knowledge/structure" information designed for primary care settings. We evaluated the tool's performance compared with genetic-counselor-collected information for clinical risk stratification in a population with barriers to access., Methods: English- or Spanish-speaking patients aged 18 to 49 were invited to participate. Individuals with limited family knowledge or at high or moderate risk based on their responses in the tool were offered genetic testing and counseling. We assessed overall agreement of family history collected in the tool compared with family history collected by the genetic counselors using Krippendorff's alpha (K-alpha). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess characteristics associated with inaccuracy., Results: Most people (94%, n  = 1711) who interacted with the tool completed it. Those included in the agreement analysis ( n  = 604) had a median age of 36.3 years, 81.6% were female, and 44.4% were Non-Hispanic White. Both the B-RST 3.0 and PREMM 5 had moderate agreement: 69.9% (K-alpha = .40, 95% CI [0.32, 0.47]) and 83.9% (K-alpha = .52, 95% CI [0.43, 0.60]), respectively. Agreement was high (96%) for people with clinically significant risk for one of the hereditary cancer syndromes. For B-RST 3.0, the factors significantly associated with inaccuracy were study site, sex, and race/ethnicity. For PREMM 5 , age, sex, and education were associated with inaccuracy. Barriers to access were not associated with inaccuracy., Conclusion: Implementation of this tool could increase identification of individuals at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes, including those with barriers to health care access., Competing Interests: PREMM and all associated logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. Dr Syngal has rights to an inventor portion of the licensing revenue from PREMM5. Dr Bellcross has rights to inventor portion of the licensing revenue of the B-RST model., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Purpose: With increasing utilization of genetic testing, sharing genetic information can become part of general family health communication while providing biological relatives with important information about their own genetic risk. Importantly, little is known about motivations for and barriers to family communication of genetic information in historically underserved populations., Methods: Using mixed methods, we explored patient experiences with family communication in a study population of English- and Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 to 49 years, enriched for participants from historically underserved backgrounds. Risk screening for hereditary cancer guided genetic testing for cancer risk genes and other medically actionable findings., Results: Most participants overall (91%), including most with normal findings (89%), shared or planned to share their results with relatives. Common motivations for sharing results were to give relatives information about their genetic risk and because the participant thought the results were interesting. Reasons for not sharing were limited contact with relatives, perceptions of limited clinical utility for relatives, and concern that discussion of genetic information was stigmatized or taboo., Conclusion: Results demonstrate high rates of sharing genetic information, indicate motivations for sharing go beyond facilitating genetic testing for relatives, and suggest general willingness to share genetic information as part of family health communication., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Laura Amendola is an employee and shareholder of Illumina. The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Screening with mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important risk management strategy for individuals with inherited pathogenic variants (PVs) in genes associated with increased breast cancer risk. We describe longitudinal screening adherence in individuals who underwent cancer genetic testing as part of usual care in a vertically integrated health system., Methods: We determined the proportion time covered (PTC) by annual mammography and breast MRI for individuals with PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, and ATM. We determined time covered by biennial mammography beginning at age 50 years for individuals who received negative results, uncertain results, or with PVs in genes without specific breast cancer screening recommendations., Results: One hundred and forty individuals had PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, or ATM. Among these individuals, average PTC was 48% (range 0-99%) for annual screening mammography and 34% (range 0-100%) for annual breast MRI. Average PTC was highest for individuals with PVs in CHEK2 (N = 14) and lowest for individuals with PVs in TP53 (N = 3). Average PTC for biennial mammography (N = 1,027) was 49% (0-100%)., Conclusion: Longitudinal screening adherence in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes, as measured by the proportion of time covered, is low; adherence to annual breast MRI falls below that of annual mammography. Additional research should examine screening behavior in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes with a goal of developing interventions to improve adherence to recommended risk management., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Genetic testing can identify cancer risk early, enabling prevention and early detection. We describe use of risk management interventions following genetic testing in the Cancer Health Assessment Reaching Many (CHARM) study. CHARM assessed risk and provided genetic testing to low income, low literacy, and other underserved populations that historically face barriers to accessing cancer genetic services., Methods: CHARM was implemented in Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) and Denver Health (DH) between 2018 and 2020. We identified post-testing screening (mammography, breast MRI, colonoscopy) and surgical (mastectomy, oophorectomy) procedures using electronic health records. We examined utilization in participants who did and did not receive actionable risk management recommendations from study genetic counselors following national guidelines., Results: CHARM participants were followed for an average of 15.4 months (range: 0.4-27.8 months) after results disclosure. Less than 2% (11/680) received actionable risk management recommendations (i.e., could be completed in the initial years following testing) based on their test result. Among those who received actionable recommendations, risk management utilization was moderate (54.5%, 6/11 completed any procedure) and varied by procedure (mammogram: 0/3; MRI: 2/4; colonoscopy: 4/5; mastectomy: 1/5; oophorectomy: 0/3). Cancer screening and surgery procedures were rare in participants without actionable recommendations., Conclusion: Though the number of participants who received actionable risk management recommendations was small, our results suggest that implementing CHARM's risk assessment and testing model increased access to evidence-based genetic services and provided opportunities for patients to engage in recommended preventive care, without encouraging risk management overuse., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The objective of this study was to identify interpretation challenges specific to exome sequencing and errors of potential clinical significance in the context of genetic counseling for adults at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome. Thirty transcripts of interpreter-mediated telephone results disclosure genetic counseling appointments were coded for errors by bilingual researchers, and the coders applied an overall rating to denote the degree to which the errors interfered with communication overall. Genetic counselors reviewed a subset of errors flagged for potential clinical significance to identify those likely to have clinical impact. Qualitative interviews with 19 interpreters were analyzed to elucidate the challenges they face in interpreting for genetic counseling appointments. Our analysis identified common interpretation errors such as raising the register, omissions, and additions. Further, we found errors specific to genetic counseling concepts and content that appeared to impact the ability of the genetic counselor to accurately assess risk. These errors also may have impacted the patient's ability to understand their results, access appropriate follow-up care, and communicate with family members. Among interpreters' strengths was the use of requests for clarification; in fact, even more use of clarification would have been beneficial in these encounters. Qualitative interviews surfaced challenges stemming from the structure of interpreter work, such as switching from medical and nonmedical interpretations without substantial breaks. Importantly, while errors were frequent, most did not impede communication overall, and most were not likely to impact clinical care. Nevertheless, potentially clinically impactful errors in communication of genetics concepts may contribute to inequitable care for limited English proficient patients and suggest that additional training in genetics and specialization in healthcare may be warranted. In addition, training for genetic counselors and guidance for patients in working effectively with interpreters could enhance interpreters' transmission of complex genetic concepts., (© 2023 National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Introduction: Research on the perceived utility of genomic sequencing has focused primarily on pediatric populations and on individuals and families with rare genetic diseases. Here, we evaluate how well a multifaceted perceived utility model developed with these populations applies to a diverse, adult population aged 18-49 at risk for hereditary cancer and propose new considerations for the model., Methods: Participants received clinical genomic sequencing in the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with a subset of participants at 1 and 6 months after results disclosure. We used an approach influenced by grounded theory to examine perceptions of the utility of genomic sequencing and analyzed how utility in CHARM mapped to the published multifaceted perceived utility model, noting which domains were represented or absent and which were most salient to our population., Results: Participants' discussions of utility often involved multiple domains and revealed the variety of ways in which receiving sequencing results can impact one's life. Results demonstrated that an individual's perception of utility can change over the life course when sequenced at a relatively young age and may be influenced by the resources available to them to act on the results., Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate the relevance of a multifaceted perceived utility model for a diverse adult population at risk for hereditary cancer. We identified refinements that could make the model more robust, including emphasizing the overlapping nature of the domains and the importance of life stage and personal resources to the perception of utility., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Purpose: Effective approaches to communicate genomic information are needed to ensure equitable care. In a randomized controlled superiority trial, we tested a novel practice model that aims to make genetic counseling inclusive, by making the communication accessible, relational, and actionable (ARIA)., Methods: In total, 696 English- and Spanish-speaking patients aged 18 to 49 years, enriched for individuals from historically underserved backgrounds, were randomized in 1:1 ratio to ARIA or usual care. Primary outcomes were accuracy of recall, communication satisfaction, and perceived understanding. In total, 33 participants completed qualitative interviews., Results: Recall and understanding were high for all participants. ARIA participants scored higher on the relationship scale of communication satisfaction (mean difference = 0.09, 95% CI = <0.01 to 0.17). Moderator analyses of communication satisfaction showed that those with lower health literacy reported less communication difficulty in ARIA and those using medical interpreters reported greater communication ease in ARIA. No significant difference was found on other primary and secondary outcomes. Qualitative data enhanced understanding of how and why ARIA can be effective., Conclusion: This study provides evidence that a genetic counseling intervention that focuses on specific communication skills to enhance relationship-building, patient engagement, and comprehension can be effective with all patients and may be especially valuable for patients of lower health literacy and Spanish-speakers who use a medical interpreter., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest One of the coauthors, L.M.A., is an employee at Illumina, Inc. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. All rights reserved.)

Background: Germline genetic testing enables primary cancer prevention, including through prophylactic surgery. We examined risk-reducing surgeries in unaffected individuals tested for hereditary cancer susceptibly between 2010 and 2018 in the Kaiser Permanente Northwest health system., Methods: We used an internal genetic testing database to create a cohort of individuals who received tests including one or more high-penetrance hereditary cancer susceptibility gene. We then identified, after testing, bilateral mastectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), and total hysterectomy procedures in electronic health record and claims data through 2019. We describe surgery utilization by genetic test results and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines., Results: The cohort included 1020 individuals, 16% with pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants in one or more of the following genes: BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, APC, MUTYH, ATM, MSH2, PALB2, BRIP1, MLH1, MSH6, EPCAM, FLCN, RAD51C, RAD51D, or TP53. Among individuals with P/LP variants making them candidates for mastectomy, BSO, or hysterectomy per NCCN guidelines, 34% (33/97), 24% (23/94), and 8% (1/12), respectively, underwent surgery during follow-up. Fifty-three percent (18/37) of hysterectomies were among APC, BRCA1, and BRCA2 P/LP variant heterozygotes, typically concurrent with BSO. Three individuals with variants of uncertain significance (only) and 22 with negative results had prophylactic surgery after genetic testing., Conclusions: Uptake of risk-reducing surgery following usual care genetic testing appears to be lower than in studies that actively recruit high-risk patients and provide testing and follow-up care in specialized settings. Factors in addition to genetic test results and NCCN guidelines motivate prophylactic surgery use and deserve further study., (© 2022 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Risk assessment for hereditary cancer syndromes is recommended in primary care, but family history is rarely collected in enough detail to facilitate risk assessment and referral - a roadblock that disproportionately impacts individuals with healthcare access barriers. We sought to qualitatively assess a literacy-adapted, electronic patient-facing family history tool developed for use in diverse, underserved patient populations recruited in the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) Study., Methods: Interview participants were recruited from a subpopulation of CHARM participants who experienced barriers to tool use in terms of spending a longer time to complete the tool, having incomplete attempts, and/or providing inaccurate family history in comparison to a genetic counselor-collected standard. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants about barriers and facilitators to tool use and overall tool acceptability; interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. Transcripts were coded based on a codebook developed using inductive techniques, and coded excerpts were reviewed to identify overarching themes related to barriers and facilitators to family history self-assessment and acceptability of the study tool., Results: Interviewees endorsed the tool as easy to navigate and understand. However, they described barriers related to family history information, literacy and language, and certain tool functions. Participants offered concrete, easy-to-implement solutions to each barrier. Despite experience barriers to use of the tool, most participants indicated that electronic family history self-assessment was acceptable or preferable in comparison to clinician-collected family history., Conclusions: Even for participants who experienced barriers to tool use, family history self-assessment was considered an acceptable alternative to clinician-collected family history. Barriers experienced could be overcome with minor adaptations to the current family history tool., Trial Registration: This study is a sub-study of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) trial, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03426878. Registered 8 February 2018., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the laboratory-related outcomes of participants who were offered genomic testing based on cancer family history risk assessment tools., Methods: Patients from clinics that serve populations with access barriers, who are screened at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome based on adapted family history collection tools (the Breast Cancer Genetics Referral Screening Tool and PREMM 5 ), were offered exome-based panel testing for cancer risk and medically actionable secondary findings. We used descriptive statistics, electronic health record review, and inferential statistics to explore participant characteristics and results, consultations and actions related to pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants identified, and variables predicting category of findings, respectively., Results: Of all the participants, 87% successfully returned a saliva kit. Overall, 5% had a pathogenic/likely pathogenic cancer risk variant and 1% had a secondary finding. Almost all (14/15, 93%) participants completed recommended consultations with nongenetics providers after an average of 17 months. The recommended actions (eg, breast magnetic resonance imaging) were completed by 17 of 25 participants. Participant personal history of cancer and PREMM 5 score were each associated with the category of findings (history and colon cancer finding, Fisher's exact P = .02; history and breast cancer finding, Fisher's exact P = .01; PREMM 5 TM score; and colon cancer finding, Fisher's exact P < .001)., Conclusion: This accessible model of hereditary cancer risk assessment and genetic testing yielded results that were often acted upon by patients and physicians., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest S.S. reports being a consultant for Myriad Genetics and reports receiving an inventor share of licensing revenues from the PREMM model. L.M.A. is an employee of Illumina, Inc. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Synthesis and curation of evidence regarding the clinical actionability of secondary findings (SFs) from genome-scale sequencing are needed to support decision-making on reporting of these findings. To assess actionability of SFs in children and adolescents, the Clinical Genome Resource established the Pediatric Actionability Working Group (AWG)., Methods: The Pediatric AWG modified the framework of the existing Adult AWG, which included production of summary reports of actionability for genes and associated conditions and consensus actionability scores for specific outcome-intervention pairs. Modification of the adult framework for the pediatric setting included accounting for special considerations for reporting presymptomatic or predictive genetic findings in the pediatric context, such as maintaining future autonomy by not disclosing conditions not actionable until adulthood. The Pediatric AWG then applied this new framework to genes and associated conditions with putative actionability., Results: As of September 2021, the Pediatric AWG applied the new framework to 70 actionability topics representing 143 genes. Reports and scores are publicly available at www.clinicalgenome.org., Conclusion: The Pediatric AWG continues to curate gene-condition topics and build an evidence-based resource, supporting clinical communities and decision-makers with policy development on the return of SFs in pediatric populations., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest R.D.S. has equity interest in and has received consulting fees from Acer Inc and PTC Therapeutics. He has received consulting fees from Aeglea BioTherapeutics; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Best Doctors; Health Advances LLC; Precision for Value; and Travere Therapeutics, Inc; and honoraria from Medscape/WebMD LLC and The France Foundation. R.D.S. is an employee of PreventionGenetics. He received research funding from Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc and the Smith Lemli Opitz Foundation. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited cause of colorectal and endometrial cancers. Identifying individuals at risk for LS without personal cancer history requires detailed collection and assessment of family health history. However, barriers exist to family health history collection, especially in historically underserved populations. To improve LS risk assessment in historically underserved populations, we adapted the provider-facing PREdiction Model for gene Mutations (PREMM 5 ™ model), a validated LS risk assessment model, into a patient-facing electronic application through an iterative development process involving expert and patient stakeholders. We report on preliminary findings based on the first 500 individuals exposed to the adapted application in a primary care population enriched for low-literacy and low-resource patients. Major adaptations to the PREMM 5 ™ provider module included reduction in reading level, addition of interactive literacy aids, incorporation of family history assessment for both maternal and paternal sides of the family, and inclusion of questions about individual relatives or small groups of relatives to reduce cognitive burden. In the first 500 individuals, 90% completed the PREMM 5 ™ independently; of those, 94% did so in 5 min or less (ranged from 0.2 to 48.8 min). The patient-facing application was able to accurately classify 84% of patients as having clinically significant or not clinically significant LS risk. Our preliminary results suggest that in this diverse study population, most participants were able to rapidly, accurately, and independently complete an interactive application collecting family health history assessment that accurately assessed for Lynch syndrome risk., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: A critical step in access to genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes is referral for genetic counseling to assess personal and family risk. Individuals meeting testing guidelines have the greatest need to be evaluated. However, referrals to genetics are underutilized in US patients with hereditary cancer syndromes, especially within traditionally underserved populations, including racial and ethnic minorities, low-income, and non-English speaking patients., Methods: We studied existing processes for referral to genetic evaluation and testing for hereditary cancer risk to identify areas of potential improvement in delivering these services, especially for traditionally underserved patients. We conducted a retrospective review of 820 referrals to the Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) genetics department containing diagnosis codes for hereditary cancer risk. We classified referrals as high- or low-quality based on whether sufficient information was provided to determine if patients met national practice guidelines for testing. Through chart abstraction, we also assessed consistency with practice guidelines, whether the referral resulted in a visit to the genetics department for evaluation, and clinical characteristics of patients receiving genetic testing., Results: Most referrals (n = 514, 63%) contained sufficient information to assess the appropriateness of referral; of those, 92% met practice guidelines for genetic testing. Half of referred patients (50%) were not offered genetic evaluation; only 31% received genetic testing. We identified several barriers to receiving genetic evaluation and testing, the biggest barrier being completion of a family history form sent to patients following the referral. Those with a referral consistent with testing guidelines, were more likely to receive genetic testing than those without (39% vs. 29%, respectively; p = 0.0058). Traditionally underserved patients were underrepresented in those receiving genetic evaluation and testing relative to the overall adult KPNW population., Conclusions: Process improvements are needed to increase access to genetic services to diagnose hereditary cancer syndromes prior to development of cancer., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Sapna Syngal Consulting or Advisory Role: Myriad Genetics, DC Health Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute has a registered service mark for the PREMM5 model and holds copyrights for the PREMM questionnaires; Myriad Genetics (through Dana-Farber Cancer Institute) paid an inventor share of the IP (license issue fee) No other potential conflicts of interest were reported. Sapna Syngal Consulting or Advisory Role: Myriad Genetics, DC Health Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute has a registered service mark for the PREMM5 model and holds copyrights for the PREMM questionnaires; Myriad Genetics (through Dana-Farber Cancer Institute) paid an inventor share of the IP (license issue fee) No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Objectives: To evaluate potential consequences of expanded carrier screening (ECS) for reproductive risk on health care utilization among women who are not at increased reproductive risk., Study Design: Women planning pregnancy were randomized to usual care carrier screening or ECS to assess reproductive risks. Electronic health record (EHR) data were used to evaluate the effects of ECS on pregnancy-related utilization and general health care utilization among all study participants who did not receive positive ECS results of at least a 25% risk (ie, received negative [normal] ECS results)., Methods: EHR data were extracted through research-ready databases and extensive chart review for 304 participants. We analyzed the effect of ECS for women who were not found to be at increased reproductive risk on (1) utilization of mental health services in the period between randomization and initial results disclosure; (2) utilization of general outpatient and inpatient services, specialty services, and mental health-related services in the year following randomization; and (3) utilization and refusal of pregnancy-related services among pregnant women (n = 129) prior to and following randomization., Results: No significant differences in health care utilization were found between women randomized to receive ECS and those receiving usual care. Women who received negative ECS results did not refuse recommended screening for conditions that are not identified via ECS at a higher rate than women in the usual care arm., Conclusions: These results suggest that ECS does not have unintended negative impacts on the health care system for the majority of patients who are not at increased reproductive risk.

Advances in the application of genomic technologies in clinical care have the potential to increase existing healthcare disparities. Studies have consistently shown that only a fraction of eligible patients with a family history of cancer receive recommended cancer genetic counseling and subsequent genetic testing. Care delivery models using pre-test and post-test counseling are not scalable, which contributes to barriers in accessing genetics services. These barriers are even more pronounced for patients in historically underserved populations. We have designed a multimodal intervention to improve subsequent cancer surveillance, by improving the identification of patients at risk for familial cancer syndromes, reducing barriers to genetic counseling/testing, and increasing patient understanding of complex genetic results. We are evaluating this intervention in two large, integrated healthcare systems that serve diverse patient populations (NCT03426878). The primary outcome is the number of diagnostic (hereditary cancer syndrome) findings. We are examining the clinical and personal utility of streamlined pathways to genetic testing using electronic medical record data, surveys, and qualitative interviews. We will assess downstream care utilization of individuals receiving usual clinical care vs. genetic testing through the study. We will evaluate the impacts of a literacy-focused genetic counseling approach versus usual care genetic counseling on care utilization and participant understanding, satisfaction, and family communication. By recruiting participants belonging to historically underserved populations, this study is uniquely positioned to evaluate the potential of a novel genetics care delivery program to reduce care disparities., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To describe the training and early implementation of the ARIA model of genetic counseling (Accessible, Relational, Inclusive, Actionable)., Methods: As part of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study, an interdisciplinary workgroup developed the ARIA curriculum and trained genetic counselors to return exome sequencing results using the ARIA model., Curriculum: The ARIA curriculum includes didactic elements, discussion, readings, role plays, and observations of usual care genetic counseling sessions. The ARIA model provides the skills and strategies needed for genetic counseling to be accessible to all patients, regardless of prior knowledge or literacy level; involves appropriate psychological and social counseling without overwhelming the patient with information; and leaves the patient with clear and actionable next steps., Conclusion: With sufficient training and practice, the ARIA model appears to be feasible, with promise for ensuring that genetic counselors' communication is accessible, relational, inclusive and actionable for the diverse patients participating in genomic medicine., Practice Implications: ARIA offers a coherent set of principles and strategies for effective communication with patients of all literacy levels and outlines specific techniques to practice and incorporate these skills into routine practice. The ARIA model could be integrated into genetic counseling training programs and practice, making genetic counseling more accessible and meaningful for all patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no declarations of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Genomic sequencing results need to be effectively communicated across all populations and practice settings. Projects in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium enroll diverse racial/ethnic and medically underserved participants across various clinical contexts. This article explores a set of CSER results disclosure cases to expand the evidence base on experiences returning genomic results. Case details were collected using a structured set of questions. We identified common themes in the case set, and assessed challenges and strategies in achieving six relevant results disclosure objectives. CSER-affiliated patient/community stakeholder impressions of the findings were solicited via video conference calls. Seventeen cases across six CSER projects were included. Case themes sorted into four categories: (1) factors influencing participant understanding, (2) participant emotional response, (3) disease burden, and (4) logistical challenges. Challenges meeting results disclosure objectives included a lack of dialogue, health literacy level, unexpected findings, and complex concepts. Strategies were consistent with traditional genetic counseling practice, but also highlighted approaches being evaluated in CSER projects. Patient/community stakeholders supported the identified themes and provided additional suggestions to improve patient understanding and engagement. These experiences add valuable insights into adapting genomic results disclosure practices to best serve all patient populations.

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., (© 2020 National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Background: Clinical genomic implementation studies pose challenges for informed consent. Consent forms often include complex language and concepts, which can be a barrier to diverse enrollment, and these studies often blur traditional research-clinical boundaries. There is a move toward self-directed, web-based research enrollment, but more evidence is needed about how these enrollment approaches work in practice. In this study, we developed and evaluated a literacy-focused, web-based consent approach to support enrollment of diverse participants in an ongoing clinical genomic implementation study. Methods : As part of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study, we developed a web-based consent approach that featured plain language, multimedia, and separate descriptions of clinical care and research activities. CHARM offered clinical exome sequencing to individuals at high risk of hereditary cancer. We interviewed CHARM participants about their reactions to the consent approach. We audio recorded, transcribed, and coded interviews using a deductively and inductively derived codebook. We reviewed coded excerpts as a team to identify overarching themes. Results : We conducted 32 interviews, including 12 (38%) in Spanish. Most (69%) enrolled without assistance from study staff, usually on a mobile phone. Those who completed enrollment in one day spent an average of 12 minutes on the consent portion. Interviewees found the information simple to read but comprehensive, were neutral to positive about the multimedia support, and identified increased access to testing in the study as the key difference from clinical care. Conclusions : This study showed that interviewees found our literacy-focused, web-based consent approach acceptable; did not distinguish the consent materials from other online study processes; and valued getting access to testing in the study. Overall, conducting empirical bioethics research in an ongoing clinical trial was useful to demonstrate the acceptability of our novel consent approach but posed practical challenges.

Background: Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndrome. This study assesses trends in diagnosis of LS and adherence to recommended LS-related care in a large integrated healthcare organization (~ 575,000 members)., Methods: Electronic medical record (EMR) data (1999-2015) were examined to identify patients with a diagnosis of LS. We examined their LS-associated care recommendations and adherence to these recommendations. Qualitative patient and provider interviews were conducted with the aim of identifying opportunities for improved care delivery., Results: We identified 74 patients with a diagnosis of LS; 64% were diagnosed with a LS-related malignancy prior to their diagnosis of LS. The time to LS diagnosis following development of a LS-related cancer decreased over time: before 2009 11% of individuals received a diagnosis of LS within 1 year of developing a LS-related cancer compared to 83% after 2009 ( p  < 0.0001). Colonoscopy recommendations were documented in the EMR for almost all patients with LS (96%). Documentation of other recommendations for cancer surveillance was less commonly found. Overall, patient adherence to colonoscopy was high (M = 81.5%; SD = 32.7%), and adherence to other recommendations varied. To improve care coordination, patients and providers suggested providing automated reminder prompts for LS-related surveillance, adding a LS-specific diagnosis code, and providing guidelines for LS-related surveillance in the EMR., Conclusions: We identified fewer than expected patients with LS in our large care system, indicating that there is still a diagnostic care gap. However, patients with LS were likely to receive and follow CRC surveillance recommendations. Recommendations for and adherence to extracolonic surveillance were variable. Improved care coordination and clearer documentation of the LS diagnosis is needed., Competing Interests: Competing interestsS. Syngal is a consultant for Myriad Genetics, Inc. and receives an inventor share of royalties from the PREMM model. No other competing interests are reported by the authors of this study., (© The Author(s). 2019.)

A subset of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are attributable to Lynch syndrome (LS), a hereditary form of CRC. Effective evaluation for LS can be done on CRC tumors to guide diagnostic testing. Increased diagnosis of LS allows for surveillance and risk reduction, which can mitigate CRC-related burden and prevent cancer-related deaths. We evaluated participation in LS screening among newly diagnosed adult CRC patients. Some cases were referred for genetics evaluation prior to study recruitment (selective screening). Those not referred directly were randomized to the intervention or control (usual care) arms. Control cases were observed for one year, then given information about LS screening. Patients who declined participation were followed through the medical record. Of 601 cases of CRC, 194 (32%) enrolled in our study and were offered LS screening, 43 (7%) were followed as a control group, 148 (25%) declined participation and 216 (36%) were ineligible [63 (10%) of which received prior selective screening]. Six and nine cases of LS were identified through the intervention and selective screening groups, respectively. Overall, a higher proportion of PMS2 variants were identified in the intervention (3/6, 50%) versus selective screening groups (2/9, 22%) (not statistically significant). Eighty-eight percent and 23% of intervention and control patients, respectively, received LS screening. No control patients were found to have LS. Systems-based approaches are needed to ensure we fully identify LS cases. The proportion of LS cases from this program was 4% of newly diagnosed cases of CRC, similar to other programs.

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.

A research study utilizing whole-genome sequence analysis for preconception carrier screening provided a genome-first detection of a severe de novo Factor VIII mutation in a woman with implications for pregnancy management and life-saving interventions of her newborn son, and a challenge to the existing paradigm regarding carrier testing.

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.

Advances in technology and the promise of personalized health care are driving greater use of genome sequencing (GS) for a variety of clinical scenarios. As health systems consider adopting GS, they need to understand the impact of GS on the organization and cost of care. While research has documented a dramatic decrease in the cost of sequencing and interpreting GS, few studies have examined how GS impacts genetic counseling workloads. This study examined the time needed to provide genetic counseling for GS in the context of preconception carrier screening. Genetic counselors prospectively reported on the time spent in the results disclosure process with 107 study participants who were part of the NextGen study. We found that the median time for results disclosure was 64 min (ranged from 5 to 229 min). Preparation work was the most time-consuming activity. Qualitative data from journal entries, debrief interviews with genetic counselors, and detailed case conference notes provided information on factors influencing time for results disclosure and implications for practice. Results suggest that expanded carrier screening could require significant increases in genetic counseling time, unless we are able to generate new resources to reduce preparation work or develop other strategies such as the creation of new models to deliver this type of service.

Advances in sequencing technologies permit the analysis of a larger selection of genes for preconception carrier screening. The study was designed as a sequential carrier screen using genome sequencing to analyze 728 gene-disorder pairs for carrier and medically actionable conditions in 131 women and their partners (n = 71) who were planning a pregnancy. We report here on the clinical laboratory results from this expanded carrier screening program. Variants were filtered and classified using the latest American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guideline; only pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants were confirmed by orthologous methods before being reported. Novel missense variants were classified as variants of uncertain significance. We reported 304 variants in 202 participants. Twelve carrier couples (12/71 couples tested) were identified for common conditions; eight were carriers for hereditary hemochromatosis. Although both known and novel variants were reported, 48% of all reported variants were missense. For novel splice-site variants, RNA-splicing assays were performed to aid in classification. We reported ten copy-number variants and five variants in non-coding regions. One novel variant was reported in F8, associated with hemophilia A; prenatal testing showed that the male fetus harbored this variant and the neonate suffered a life-threatening hemorrhage which was anticipated and appropriately managed. Moreover, 3% of participants had variants that were medically actionable. Compared with targeted mutation screening, genome sequencing improves the sensitivity of detecting clinically significant variants. While certain novel variant interpretation remains challenging, the ACMG guidelines are useful to classify variants in a healthy population., (Copyright © 2018 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Genomic carrier screening can identify more disease-associated variants than existing carrier screening methodologies, but its utility from patients' perspective is not yet established. A randomized controlled trial for preconception genomic carrier screening provided an opportunity to understand patients' decisions about whether to accept or decline testing. We administered a survey to potential genomic carrier screening recipients who declined participation (N = 240) to evaluate their reasons for doing so. Two thirds of women declined participation. We identified major themes describing reasons these individuals declined to participate; the most common were time limitation, lack of interest, not wanting to know the information, and potential cause of worry or anxiety. Most women eligible for genomic carrier screening indicated that their reasons for opting out were due to logistical issues rather than opposing the rationale for testing. As expanded carrier screening and genomic sequencing become a more routine part of clinical care, it is anticipated there will be variable uptake from individuals for this testing. Thus, the advancement of clinical carrier screening from single genes, to expanded screening panels, to an exome- or genome-wide platform, will require approaches that respect individual choice to receive genetic testing for reproductive risk assessment.

Background: While translational genomic sequencing research is increasing, few studies have been limited to healthy individuals; most have focused on patients with a disease or a strong family history of a disorder. The limited studies that have included healthy individuals have focused on the disclosure of medically actionable secondary results, rather than carrier status, to assess reproductive risks. To address this important gap, we conducted the NextGen study, which focuses on carrier status and medically actionable secondary findings in a population of women planning a pregnancy., Methods: We assessed 310 participants' motivations for receiving genome sequencing for expanded carrier screening and experiences with familial genetic conditions that may relate to study participation., Results: Most participants reported that obtaining general health information from genome sequencing was their primary motivator, even though they were recruited to join a study to learn more about carrier status. Forty-two percent of enrolled women became pregnant prior to obtaining sequencing results., Conclusion: Genomic carrier testing may need to be offered to women prior to active pregnancy efforts to be useful for reproductive planning.

Universal screening for Lynch syndrome (LS) among all cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) could increase the diagnosis of LS and reduce morbidity and mortality of LS-associated cancers. Given universal screening includes all patients, irrespective of high risk factors such early age at onset or family history of CRC, it is important to understand perspectives of all patients and not just those at high risk. As part of a study to assess the feasibility and implementation of universal screening, 189 patients newly diagnosed with CRC were surveyed about their interest in screening for LS and communication of results with at-risk family members. Overall, participants responded positively regarding screening for LS, with most wanting to know their genetic risks in general (86%) and risk of hereditary CRC (93%). Prior to receiving screening results, most participants stated they intended to share their screening results with parents (89%), siblings (96%), and children (96%). Of the 28 participants who received a positive LS screening result, 26 (93%) reported sharing their result with at least one first-degree family member. Interest in screening for LS and communication of screening results with family members was not associated with high risk factors. This study indicates that patients are interested in being screened for LS and that sharing information on the risk of LS with at-risk family members is not a significant barrier. These findings provide novel insight into patient perspectives about screening for LS and can guide successful implementation of universal screening programs.

As genome or exome sequencing (hereafter genome-scale sequencing) becomes more integrated into standard care, carrier testing is an important possible application. Carrier testing using genome-scale sequencing can identify a large number of conditions, but choosing which conditions/genes to evaluate as well as which results to disclose can be complicated. Carrier testing generally occurs in the context of reproductive decision-making and involves patient values in a way that other types of genetic testing may not. The Kaiser Permanente Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research program is conducting a randomized clinical trial of preconception carrier testing that allows participants to select their preferences for results from among broad descriptive categories rather than selecting individual conditions. This paper describes (1) the criteria developed by the research team, the return of results committee (RORC), and stakeholders for defining the categories; (2) the process of refining the categories based on input from patient focus groups and validation through a patient survey; and (3) how the RORC then assigned specific gene-condition pairs to taxonomy categories being piloted in the trial. The development of four categories (serious, moderate/mild, unpredictable, late onset) for sharing results allows patients to select results based on their values without separately deciding their interest in knowing their carrier status for hundreds of conditions. A fifth category, lifespan limiting, was always shared. The lessons learned may be applicable in other results disclosure situations, such as incidental findings., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Advances in genome sequencing and gene discovery have created opportunities to efficiently assess more genetic conditions than ever before. Given the large number of conditions that can be screened, the implementation of expanded carrier screening using genome sequencing will require practical methods of simplifying decisions about the conditions for which patients want to be screened. One method to simplify decision making is to generate a taxonomy based on expert judgment. However, expert perceptions of condition attributes used to classify these conditions may differ from those used by patients. To understand whether expert and patient perceptions differ, we asked women who had received preconception genetic carrier screening in the last 3 years to fill out a survey to rate the attributes (predictability, controllability, visibility, and severity) of several autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic conditions. These conditions were classified into one of five taxonomy categories developed by subject experts (significantly shortened lifespan, serious medical problems, mild medical problems, unpredictable medical outcomes, and adult-onset conditions). A total of 193 women provided 739 usable ratings across 20 conditions. The mean ratings and correlations demonstrated that participants made distinctions across both attributes and categories. Aggregated mean attribute ratings across categories demonstrated logical consistency between the key features of each attribute and category, although participants perceived little difference between the mild and serious categories. This study provides empirical evidence for the validity of our proposed taxonomy, which will simplify patient decisions for results they would like to receive from preconception carrier screening via genome sequencing., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Universal tumor screening for Lynch syndrome, the most common form of hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC), has been recommended among all patients newly diagnosed with CRC. However, there is limited literature regarding patient perspectives of tumor screening for Lynch syndrome among patients with CRC who are not selected for screening based on family history criteria., Methods: A total of 145 patients aged 39 to 87 years were administered surveys assessing perceived risk, patient perspectives, and potential benefits of and barriers to tumor screening for Lynch syndrome. Associations between patient-specific and cancer-specific factors and survey responses were analyzed., Results: The majority of participants perceived their risk of developing Lynch syndrome as being low, with 9 participants (6.2%) anticipating an abnormal screening result. However, most participants endorsed the potential benefits of screening for themselves and their families, with 84.8% endorsing ≥6 benefits and 50.3% endorsing all 8 benefits. Participants also endorsed few potential barriers to screening, with 89.4% endorsing ≤4 of 9 potential barriers. A common barrier was worry about the cost of additional testing and surveillance, which was endorsed by 54.5% of participants. The level of distress associated with tumor screening for Lynch syndrome, which was very low, was not associated with age or CRC stage., Conclusions: The results of the current study indicate that patients with CRC overall have a positive attitude toward tumor screening for Lynch syndrome, endorse the benefits of screening, and experience low levels of distress. These findings provide insight into patient attitudes toward tumor screening for Lynch syndrome among unselected patients with CRC to inform educational approaches that assist in patient decision-making and guide the successful implementation of screening programs., (© 2015 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Whole genome and exome sequencing tests are increasingly being ordered in clinical practice, creating a need for research exploring the return of results from these tests. A goal of the Clinical Sequencing and Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium is to gain experience with this process to develop best practice recommendations for offering exome and genome testing and returning results. Genetic counselors in the CSER consortium have an integral role in the return of results from these genomic sequencing tests and have gained valuable insight. We present seven emerging themes related to return of exome and genome sequencing results accompanied by case descriptions illustrating important lessons learned, counseling challenges specific to these tests and considerations for future research and practice.

Patients in first remission of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) considered to be at high risk of relapse were offered autologous bone marrow transplantation (ABMT) using purged marrow as a therapeutic alternative to cranial irradiation and maintenance chemotherapy. Twenty-seven bone marrows taken in remission, were purged using monoclonal antibodies (anti CD7 for T lineage and anti CD10 and/or anti CD19 for B lineage leukaemias) plus rabbit complement. Retrospective analysis of 19 purged marrows by immunophenotyping or immunoglobulin gene rearrangement studies demonstrated no evidence of disease. Engraftment was seen in 26 of the patients. No correlation was found between the numbers of infused nucleated cells or colony forming units-granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM) and subsequent engraftment kinetics. The actuarial disease-free survival (DFS) is 32% at 7 years (median follow-up 3.4 years). There were two transplant related deaths (actuarial risk 8%); the main cause of treatment failure has been disease recurrence with an overall actuarial risk of 67%; 76% for T-ALL (five of nine), 62% for common ALL (five of 10), two of five pre B and none of three patients with B-ALL. In these 27 high risk patients in vitro purging of remission marrow as part of ABMT appears not to improve patient outcome, although confirmation of this would require a randomized trial.

The IBM 2991 Blood Cell Processor has been used to isolate a mononuclear cell (MNC) fraction from the marrow of 31 allogeneic donors. The MNC fraction was then incubated with a combination of two murine monoclonal antibodies MBG6 (CD6) and RFT8 (CD8) followed by two rounds of treatment with rabbit complement resulting in a marrow inoculum significantly reduced in the number of T-lymphocytes. We report here new specifications for the use of Ficoll-Metrizoate, the method used to calculate T-lymphocyte depletion and the details of our attempts to improve T-depletion. Following marrow transplantation with this T-depleted fraction, 29 patients are evaluable for engraftment, one patient failed to engraft and one died too early for evaluation. Twenty-two had no acute graft-versus-host disease (aGvHD), at a minimum of 60 d, six had grade I acute GvHD and one grade III. No correlation was found between the absolute number of MNC infused and time to engraftment, nor any relationship between the number of residual viable T-lymphocytes in the infused marrow and the incidence of GvHD, but the patient with the most severe aGvHD also had the highest number of T-lymphocytes infused.

Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation has been undertaken within this centre on 62 patients with acute or chronic leukaemia. Employing the standard separation protocol described, all bone marrows were processed on the 2991 Blood Cell Processor to isolate the 'buffy coat' cells and subsequently the mononuclear cell component using a density separation medium of Ficoll-metrizoate. Following the mononuclear cell separation, the cells were identified for their T lymphocyte component using a combination of two murine monoclonal antibodies, MBG6 reacting with a pan T cell antigen (CD6) and RFT8 detecting the 'cytotoxic/supressor' cell antigen (CD8). The numerical results for nucleated cells, red blood cells, T lymphocytes and colony forming units-granulocyte macrophage are presented.

Marrow from seven normal donors and patients has been layered onto Ficoll-Metrizoate (FM) under pressure in the IBM 2991 blood cell processor to isolate the mononuclear cell (MNC) population prior to allogeneic transplantation or cryopreservation. This separation method, which takes less than 90 min, is a further development since our previous report detailing the use of the IBM 2991 to produce a concentrated marrow 'buffy coat' for infusion (Gilmore & Prentice, 1981). By adding FM to the system, marrow stem cells are further concentrated in a small volume with removal of unwanted granulocytes and red blood cells. This facilitates in in vitro treatment of marrow with monoclonal antibodies (Granger et al. 1982) or drugs, for either the selective elimination of malignant cells prior to autologous bone marrow transplantation (BMT), or T lymphocytes in an attempt to prevent graft versus host disease (GvHD) in allogeneic BMT. Five of the seven marrows processed by this procedure have thus far been infused into lethally irradiated recipients with engraftment (allogeneic); the other two marrows have been cryopreserved.

Assays of granulocyte-macrophage colony-forming cells provide a means of testing the viability of cryopreserved bone marrow cells intended for autologous transplantation. We have compared two different sources of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating activity, giant cell tumor-conditioned medium (GCT-CM) and peripheral blood leukocyte feeder layers, to determine whether the former is a suitable substitute for leukocyte feeder layers in the assay. The results show that GCT-CM, while providing a comparable stimulus to that provided by leukocyte feeder layers for colony formation by fresh bone marrow samples, is an inadequate stimulus when cryopreserved bone marrow samples are cultured. GCT-CM is not therefore suitable for use in monitoring cryopreserved bone marrow, since there is gross underestimation of the number of colony-forming cells present when this stimulus is used. The results suggest that great care should be taken when selecting alternative sources of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating activity for culture of cryopreserved material.

Eight patients with acute leukaemia undergoing allogeneic bone-marrow transplantation from ABO-incompatible donors received red-cell-depleted donor marrow without any procedure to diminish their anti-ABO antibody titres. Successful marrow red-cell removal (mean 98.8%) was achieved by means of a large-volume separation technique on Ficoll-Metrizoate in the IBM 2991 blood-cell processor. Clinically significant ABO-haemolytic reaction was prevented in all patients, and there was neither failure of engraftment nor rejection. This approach used alone is satisfactory for most ABO-incompatible marrow-transplant recipients, although combining this with some method of recipient antibody depletion, such as plasma exchange, is recommended in the occasional patient with high anti-ABO titres.