Search

The increased use of next-generation sequencing has expanded our understanding of the involvement and prevalence of mosaicism in genetic disorders. We describe a total of eleven cases: nine in which mosaic variants detected by genome sequencing (GS) and/or targeted gene panels (TGPs) were considered to be causative for the proband's phenotype, and two of apparent parental mosaicism. Variants were identified in the following genes: PHACTR1, SCN8A, KCNT1, CDKL5, NEXMIF, CUX1, TSC2, GABRB2, and SMARCB1. In addition, we identified one large duplication including three genes, UBE3A, GABRB3, and MAGEL2, and one large deletion including deletion of ARFGAP1, EEF1A2, CHRNA4, and KCNQ2. All patients were enrolled in the NYCKidSeq study, a research program studying the communication of genomic information in clinical care, as well as the clinical utility and diagnostic yield of GS for children with suspected genetic disorders in diverse populations in New York City. We observed variability in the correlation between reported variant allele fraction and the severity of the patient's phenotype, although we were not able to determine the mosaicism percentage in clinically relevant tissue(s). Although our study was not sufficiently powered to assess differences in mosaicism detection between the two testing modalities, we saw a trend toward better detection by GS as compared with TGP testing. This case series supports the importance of mosaicism in childhood-onset genetic conditions and informs guidelines for laboratory and clinical interpretation of mosaic variants detected by GS.

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

Polygenic scores (PGS) are primed for use in personalized risk assessments for common, complex conditions and population health screening. Although there is growing evidence supporting the clinical validity of these scores in certain diseases, presently, there is no consensus on best practices for constructing PGS or demonstrated clinical utility in practice. Despite these evidence gaps, individuals can access their PGS information through commercial entities, research programs, and clinical programs. This prompts the immediate need for educational resources for clinicians encountering PGS information in clinical practice. This practice resource is intended to increase genetic counselors' and other healthcare providers' understanding and comfort with PGS used in personalized risk assessments. Drawing on best practices in clinical genomics, we discuss the unique considerations for polygenic-based (1) testing, (2) clinical genetic counseling, and (3) translation to population health services. This practice resource outlines the emerging uses of PGS, as well as the critical limitations of this technology that need to be addressed before wide-scale implementation.

Elective genetic testing (EGT) to identify disease risk in individuals who may or may not meet clinical criteria for testing is increasingly being offered in clinical practice. However, little is known about how EGT is currently implemented and how genetics professionals perceive this type of testing. We conducted a mixed-methods survey study to evaluate genetics professionals' perspectives and attitudes about EGT and describe the current landscape of EGT practices in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. Six clinical geneticists and 131 genetic counselors responded to the online survey, among whom 44% reported offering EGT in their practice. Over 84% of survey respondents agreed that EGT may improve health outcomes and understanding of genotype-phenotype correlations, and 85% agreed that potential risks include result misinterpretation and contribution to economic health disparities. Though most respondents felt comfortable providing pretest (77%) and post-test (86%) counseling for EGT, lack of provider resources (such as time and personnel) and prioritization of diagnostic testing were cited most frequently in free-text responses as reasons for not offering EGT. Of those offering EGT, 88% reported positive overall experiences. Qualitative analysis of open-ended questions identified benefits of EGT as expanding access to genetic testing, providing potential health benefits, and providing psychological benefits for patients. Disadvantages included prohibitive costs, limited clinical utility, and strain on resources. Overall, we found that genetics providers perceive both potential benefits and harms of EGT and that those offering this testing had generally positive experiences, although ethical reservations and practical limitations exist.

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

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

Assessing the risk of common, complex diseases requires consideration of clinical risk factors as well as monogenic and polygenic risks, which in turn may be reflected in family history. Returning risks to individuals and providers may influence preventive care or use of prophylactic therapies for those individuals at high genetic risk.To enable integrated genetic risk assessment, the eMERGE (electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics) network is enrolling 25,000 diverse individuals in a prospective cohort study across 10 sites. The network developed methods to return cross-ancestry polygenic risk scores (PRS), monogenic risks, family history, and clinical risk assessments via a Genome Informed Risk Assessment (GIRA) report and will assess uptake of care recommendations after return of results.GIRAs include summary care recommendations for 11 conditions, education pages, and clinical laboratory reports. The return of high-risk GIRA to individuals and providers includes guidelines for care and lifestyle recommendations. Assembling the GIRA required infrastructure and workflows for ingesting and presenting content from multiple sources. Recruitment began in February 2022.Return of a novel report for communicating monogenic, polygenic, and family history based risk factors will inform the benefits of integrated genetic risk assessment for routine health care.

PurposeUse of genomic sequencing is increasing at a pace that requires technological solutions to effectively meet the needs of a growing patient population. We developed GUÍA, a web-based application, to enhance the delivery of genomic results and related clinical information to patients and families.MethodsGUÍA development occurred in 5 phases: formative research, content development, user interface design, stakeholder/community member input, and web application development. Development was informed by qualitative research involving parents (N=22) whose children underwent genomic testing. Participants enrolled in the NYCKidSeq pilot study (N=18) completed structured feedback interviews post-result disclosure using GUÍA. Genetic specialists, researchers, patients, and community stakeholders provided their perspectives on GUÍA’s design to ensure technical, cultural, and literacy appropriateness.ResultsNYCKidSeq participants responded positively to the use of GUÍA to deliver their children’s results. All participants (N=10) with previous experience with genetic testing felt GUÍA improved result disclosure, and 17 (94%) participants said the content was clear.ConclusionsGUÍA communicates complex genomic information in an understandable and personalized manner. Initial piloting demonstrated GUÍA’s utility for families enrolled NYCKidSeq pilot study. Findings from the NYCKidSeq clinical trial will provide insight into GUÍA’s effectiveness in communicating results among diverse, multilingual populations.

BackgroundPopulation-based genomic screening has the predicted ability to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with medically actionable conditions. However, much research is needed to develop standards for genomic screening and to understand the perspectives of people offered this new testing modality. This is particularly true for non-European ancestry populations who are vastly underrepresented in genomic medicine research. Therefore, we implemented a pilot genomic screening program in the BioMeBiobank in New York City, where the majority of participants are of non-European ancestry.MethodsWe initiated genomic screening for well-established genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), Lynch syndrome (LS), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). We evaluated and included an additional gene (TTR) associated with hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR), which has a common founder variant in African ancestry populations. We evaluated the characteristics of 74 participants who received results associated with these conditions. We also assessed the preferences of 7461 newly enrolled BioMeparticipants to receive genomic results.ResultsIn the pilot genomic screening program, 74 consented participants received results related to HBOC (N = 26), LS (N = 6), FH (N = 8), and hATTR (N = 34). Thirty-three of 34 (97.1%) participants who received a result related to hATTR were self-reported African American/African (AA) or Hispanic/Latinx (HL), compared to 14 of 40 (35.0%) participants who received a result related to HBOC, LS, or FH. Among the 7461 participants enrolled after the BioMeprotocol modification to allow the return of genomic results, 93.4% indicated that they would want to receive results. Younger participants, women, and HL participants were more likely to opt to receive results.ConclusionsThe addition ofTTRto a pilot genomic screening program meant that we returned results to a higher proportion of AA and HL participants, in comparison with genes traditionally included in genomic screening programs in the USA. We found that the majority of participants in a multi-ethnic biobank are interested in receiving genomic results for medically actionable conditions. These findings increase knowledge about the perspectives of diverse research participants on receiving genomic results and inform the broader implementation of genomic medicine in underrepresented patient populations.

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.

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

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

The TTR V142I variant associated with hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR) is present in up to 4% of African American (AA) and 1% of Hispanic/Latinx (HL) individuals and increases risk for heart failure. Delayed and missed diagnoses could potentiate health disparities in these populations. We evaluated whether population-based genomic screening could effectively identify individuals at risk for hATTR and prompt initiation of risk management. We identified participants of the BioMe Biobank in New York City who received TTR V142I results through a pilot genomic screening program. We performed a retrospective medical record review to evaluate for the presence hATTR-related systemic features, uptake of recommended follow-up, and short-term outcomes. Thirty-two AA (N = 17) and HL (N = 15) individuals received a TTR V142I result (median age 57, 81% female). None had a previous diagnosis of hATTR. Eighteen (56%) had hATTR-related systemic features, including 4 (13%) with heart failure, 10 (31%) with carpal tunnel syndrome, and 10 (31%) with spinal stenosis. Eighteen (56%) pursued follow-up with a cardiologist within 8 months. One person received a diagnosis of hATTR. Thus, we found that the majority of V142I-positive individuals had hATTR-related systemic features at the time of result disclosure, including well-described red flags. Genomic screening can help identify hATTR risk and guide management early on, avoiding potential delays in diagnosis and treatment.

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

PURPOSE Limited data are available on the prevalence and clinical impact of Lynch syndrome (LS)–associated genomic variants in non-European ancestry populations. We identified and characterized individuals harboring LS-associated variants in the ancestrally diverse Bio Me Biobank in New York City. PATIENTS AND METHODS Exome sequence data from 30,223 adult Bio Me participants were evaluated for pathogenic, likely pathogenic, and predicted loss-of-function variants in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. Survey and electronic health record data from variant-positive individuals were reviewed for personal and family cancer histories. RESULTS We identified 70 individuals (0.2%) harboring LS-associated variants in MLH1 (n = 12; 17%), MSH2 (n = 13; 19%), MSH6 (n = 16; 23%), and PMS2 (n = 29; 41%). The overall prevalence was 1 in 432, with higher prevalence among individuals of self-reported African ancestry (1 in 299) than among Hispanic/Latinx (1 in 654) or European (1 in 518) ancestries. Thirteen variant-positive individuals (19%) had a personal history, and 19 (27%) had a family history of an LS-related cancer. LS-related cancer rates were highest in individuals with MSH6 variants (31%) and lowest in those with PMS2 variants (7%). LS-associated variants were associated with increased risk of colorectal (odds ratio [OR], 5.0; P = .02) and endometrial (OR, 30.1; P = 8.5 × 10−9) cancers in Bio Me. Only 2 variant-positive individuals (3%) had a documented diagnosis of LS. CONCLUSION We found a higher prevalence of LS-associated variants among individuals of African ancestry in New York City. Although cancer risk is significantly increased among variant-positive individuals, the majority do not harbor a clinical diagnosis of LS, suggesting underrecognition of this disease.

Background Increasingly, genomics is informing clinical practice, but challenges remain for medical professionals lacking genetics expertise, and in access to and clinical utility of genomic testing for minority and underrepresented populations. The latter is a particularly pernicious problem due to the historical lack of inclusion of racially and ethnically diverse populations in genomic research and genomic medicine. A further challenge is the rapidly changing landscape of genetic tests and considerations of cost, interpretation, and diagnostic yield for emerging modalities like whole-genome sequencing. Methods The NYCKidSeq project is a randomized controlled trial recruiting 1130 children and young adults predominantly from Harlem and the Bronx with suspected genetic disorders in three disease categories: neurologic, cardiovascular, and immunologic. Two clinical genetic tests will be performed for each participant, either proband, duo, or trio whole-genome sequencing (depending on sample availability) and proband targeted gene panels. Clinical utility, cost, and diagnostic yield of both testing modalities will be assessed. This study will evaluate the use of a novel, digital platform (GUÍA) to digitize the return of genomic results experience and improve participant understanding for English- and Spanish-speaking families. Surveys will collect data at three study visits: baseline (0 months), result disclosure visit (ROR1, + 3 months), and follow-up visit (ROR2, + 9 months). Outcomes will assess parental understanding of and attitudes toward receiving genomic results for their child and behavioral, psychological, and social impact of results. We will also conduct a pilot study to assess a digital tool called GenomeDiver designed to enhance communication between clinicians and genetic testing labs. We will evaluate GenomeDiver’s ability to increase the diagnostic yield compared to standard practices, improve clinician’s ability to perform targeted reverse phenotyping, and increase the efficiency of genetic testing lab personnel. Discussion The NYCKidSeq project will contribute to the innovations and best practices in communicating genomic test results to diverse populations. This work will inform strategies for implementing genomic medicine in health systems serving diverse populations using methods that are clinically useful, technologically savvy, culturally sensitive, and ethically sound. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT03738098. Registered on November 13, 2018 Trial Sponsor: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Contact Name: Eimear Kenny, PhD (Principal Investigator) Address: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Pl., Box 1003, New York, NY 10029 Email: eimear.kenny@mssm.edu

Pathogenic variants inBRCA1andBRCA2(BRCA1/2) lead to increased risk of breast, ovarian, and other cancers, but most variant positive individuals in the general population are unaware of their risk, and little is known about the prevalence of pathogenicBRCA1/2variants in non-European populations. We investigatedBRCA1/2prevalence and impact using exome sequencing and electronic health record (EHR) data from 30,223 adult participants of the BioMeBiobank in New York City. There were 218 (0.7%) individuals harboring expected pathogenic variants, resulting in an overall prevalence of 1 in 139. In sub-populations defined by genetic ancestry, the highest prevalence was in individuals of Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ; 1 in 49), Filipino and Southeast Asian (1 in 81), and Non-AJ European (1 in 103) descent. Among 218 variant positive individuals, 112 (51.4%) harbored known founder variants: 80 had AJ founder variants (BRCA1c.5266dupC and c.68_69delAG, andBRCA2c.5946delT), 7 had a Puerto Rican founder variant (BRCA2c.3922G>T), and 25 had one of 19 other founder variants. Non-European populations were more likely to harborBRCA1/2variants that were not classified in ClinVar, or that had uncertain or conflicting evidence for pathogenicity. Within mixed ancestry populations, such as Hispanic/Latinos with genetic ancestry from Africa, Europe, and the Americas, there was a strong correlation between the proportion African genetic ancestry and the likelihood of harboring aBRCA1/2variant with uncertain or conflicting evidence for pathogenicity. Based on EHR and participant questionnaire data, ∼28% of variant positive individuals had a personal history, and ∼45% a personal or family history ofBRCA1/2-associated cancers. Approximately 27% of variant positive individuals had evidence of prior clinical genetic testing forBRCA1/2. However, individuals with AJ founder variants were twice as likely to have had a clinical test (38%) than those with other pathogenic variants (19%). These findings deepen our knowledge aboutBRCA1/2variants and associated cancer risk in diverse populations, indicate a gap in knowledge about potential cancer-related variants in non-European populations, and suggest that genomic screening in diverse patient populations may be an effective tool to identify at-risk individuals.

Summary: Genetic counselors are trained to deliver complicated genomic test results to parents of pediatric patients. However, there is limited knowledge on how parents perceive this information and what they understand about the results. This research aims to qualitatively explore parents’ experiences receiving genomic test results for their children. As part of formative research for the NYCKidSeq Study, we recruited a purposive sample of parents of 22 children stratified by child race/ethnicity and test result classification (positive, uncertain, or negative) and conducted in-depth interviews using a semi-structured guide. Analysis was conducted using grounded theory’s constant comparative method across cases and themes. Parents described different elements of understanding: genetics knowledge; significance and meaning of positive, uncertain, or negative results; and implications for the health of their child and family. Parents reported challenges understanding technical details and significance of their child’s results but gladly allowed their providers to be custodians of this information. However, of the different elements of understanding described, parents cared most deeply about being able to understand implications for their child’s and family’s health. These findings suggest that a counseling approach that primarily addresses parents’ desire to understand how to best care for their child and family may be more appropriate than an information-heavy approach focused on technical details. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in larger parent cohorts and to explore ways genetic counseling can support parents’ preferences without sacrificing important components of parent understanding and overall satisfaction with their experiences with genomic medicine.

Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of ‘genomic counseling’ on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants’ informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants’ satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = −4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.

Background To address the need for more effective genomics training, beginning in 2012 the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai has offered a unique laboratory-style graduate genomics course, “Practical Analysis of Your Personal Genome” (PAPG), in which students optionally sequence and analyze their own whole genome. We hypothesized that incorporating personal genome sequencing (PGS) into the course pedagogy could improve educational outcomes by increasing student motivation and engagement. Here we extend our initial study of the pilot PAPG cohort with a report on student attitudes towards genome sequencing, decision-making, psychological wellbeing, genomics knowledge and pedagogical engagement across three course years. Methods Students enrolled in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 course years completed questionnaires before (T1) and after (T2) a prerequisite workshop (n = 110) and before (T3) and after (T4) PAPG (n = 66). Results Students’ interest in PGS was high; 56 of 59 eligible students chose to sequence their own genome. Decisional conflict significantly decreased after the prerequisite workshop (T2 vs. T1 p

Background: As whole-genome sequencing (WGS) increases in availability, WGS educational aids are needed for research participants, patients, and the general public. Our aim was therefore to develop an accessible and scalable WGS educational aid. Genet Med 18 5, 501–512. Methods: We engaged multiple stakeholders in an iterative process over a 1-year period culminating in the production of a novel 10-minute WGS educational animated video, “Whole Genome Sequencing and You” (https://goo.gl/HV8ezJ). We then presented the animated video to 281 online-survey respondents (the video-information group). There were also two comparison groups: a written-information group (n = 281) and a no-information group (n = 300). Genet Med 18 5, 501–512. Results: In the video-information group, 79% reported the video was easy to understand, satisfaction scores were high (mean 4.00 on 1–5 scale, where 5 = high satisfaction), and knowledge increased significantly. There were significant differences in knowledge compared with the no-information group but few differences compared with the written-information group. Intention to receive personal results from WGS and decisional conflict in response to a hypothetical scenario did not differ between the three groups. Genet Med 18 5, 501–512. Conclusions: The educational animated video, “Whole Genome Sequencing and You,” was well received by this sample of online-survey respondents. Further work is needed to evaluate its utility as an aid to informed decision making about WGS in other populations. Genet Med 18 5, 501–512.

1520 Background: Lynch syndrome (LS), caused by germline pathogenic variants in mismatch repair (MMR) genes, results in increased risk of colorectal, endometrial, and other cancers. LS has a prevalence of ~1 in 440 in European ancestry populations; prevalence data in other populations are limited. We identified and characterized carriers of pathogenic MMR gene variants in the multi-ethnic Bio Me Biobank in New York City. Methods: Exome sequence data from ~31,000 Bio Me participants were evaluated for known (per ClinVar) and predicted (loss-of-function) pathogenic variants in MMR genes. Population groups were defined by genetic ancestry. Participant questionnaires and electronic health records (EHRs) of carriers were reviewed for personal or family history of malignancy. Results: We identified 48 carriers of 33 distinct pathogenic variants in PMS2 (48%), MLH1 (27%), MSH6 (15%), and MSH2 (10%), for an estimated prevalence of ~1/640 in the Bio Me Biobank. Prevalence was higher among individuals of Non-Jewish European (N = 14; 1/400) and African (N = 14; 1/490) ancestries, compared to Puerto Rican (N = 8; 1/640), Ashkenazi Jewish (N = 6; 1/690), and other/mixed (N = 6) ancestries. Carriers had a median age of 56 (range 27 to 77) years and were 50% female. Overall rate of malignancy among carriers was 38%, with the lowest rate in PMS2 (26%) and the highest rate in MSH6 (57%) variant carriers. We found a high prevalence of endometrial cancer (21% of female carriers) and a lower prevalence of colorectal cancer (4% of all carriers). Only 2 carriers (4%) had a diagnosis of LS in their EHRs, and only 1 carrier met Amsterdam diagnostic criteria for LS. Conclusions: These data show that ~0.15% of participants in a multi-ethnic biobank are carriers of pathogenic MMR gene variants and suggest that the prevalence is higher in European and lower in non-European ancestry populations. Notably, most carriers do not have a clinical diagnosis of LS and do not meet diagnostic criteria for LS. Carriers demonstrate variable rates of cancer, which may contribute to under-diagnosis of LS. Genomic screening for pathogenic MMR variants may lead to earlier diagnosis of LS and improved outcomes.

The growing gap between the demand for genome sequencing and the supply of trained genomics professionals is creating an acute need to develop more effective genomics education. In response we developed “Practical Analysis of Your Personal Genome”, a novel laboratory-style medical genomics course in which students have the opportunity to obtain and analyze their own whole genome. This report describes our motivations for and the content of a “practical” genomics course that incorporates personal genome sequencing and the lessons we learned during the first three iterations of this course. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12920-015-0124-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health-care professionals need to be trained to work with whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in their practice. Our aim was to explore how students responded to a novel genome analysis course that included the option to analyze their own genomes. This was an observational cohort study. Questionnaires were administered before (T3) and after the genome analysis course (T4), as well as 6 months later (T5). In-depth interviews were conducted at T5. All students (n = 19) opted to analyze their own genomes. At T5, 12 of 15 students stated that analyzing their own genomes had been useful. Ten reported they had applied their knowledge in the workplace. Technical WGS knowledge increased (mean of 63.8% at T3, mean of 72.5% at T4; P = 0.005). In-depth interviews suggested that analyzing their own genomes may increase students’ motivation to learn and their understanding of the patient experience. Most (but not all) of the students reported low levels of WGS results–related distress and low levels of regret about their decision to analyze their own genomes. Giving students the option of analyzing their own genomes may increase motivation to learn, but some students may experience personal WGS results–related distress and regret. Additional evidence is required before considering incorporating optional personal genome analysis into medical education on a large scale. Genet Med 17 11, 866–874.