Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here

Relationships of health information orientation and cancer history on preferences for consent and control over biospecimens in a biobank: A race-stratified analysis

In this study, we investigated how patients' self-reported health information efficacy, relationship with health providers, and cancer history are associated with their preferences for informed consent and need for control over biobank biospecimens. We recruited 358 women aged 40 and older (56% African American; 44% European American) and analyzed the data using multivariable regression models. Results show that African American participants' health information efficacy was significantly and negatively associated with their need for control over biospecimens and preference for a study-specific model. European American participants' dependency on doctors was a significant and negative predictor of their preference for a study-specific model. Several significant interaction effects, which varied across races, were found with regard to health information efficacy, personal cancer history, need for control, and preference for a study-specific model. The study findings suggest it is important to consider health information efficacy, relationship with providers, and need for control when developing large diverse biobanks.

Pharmacogenomic clinical decision support design and multi-site process outcomes analysis in the eMERGE Network

To better understand the real-world effects of pharmacogenomic (PGx) alerts, this study aimed to characterize alert design within the eMERGE Network, and to establish a method for sharing PGx alert response data for aggregate analysis. Seven eMERGE sites submitted design details and established an alert logging data dictionary. Six sites participated in a pilot study, sharing alert response data from their electronic health record systems. PGx alert design varied, with some consensus around the use of active, post-test alerts to convey Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium recommendations. Sites successfully shared response data, with wide variation in acceptance and follow rates. Results reflect the lack of standardization in PGx alert design. Standards and/or larger studies will be necessary to fully understand PGx impact. This study demonstrated a method for sharing PGx alert response data and established that variation in system design is a significant barrier for multi-site analyses.

Knowledge Translation in Oncology: The Bumpy Ride From Bench to Bedside

OBJECTIVES

Knowledge translation (KT) is the dynamic process of mobilizing best-practice evidence to guide health care decisions.

METHODS

Using a PubMed search, challenges were identified and milestones defined.

RESULTS

Substantial challenges exist in integrating discoveries into patient care, including technical limitations related to genomic testing like turnaround time, standardization, reproducibility, and results interpretation. Other challenges include lack of proper training in genetic counseling for health care providers, clarity of scientific evidence, and ethical, legal and social considerations. In addition, most health care systems lack accessibility to genetic testing services. Moving forward, KT should be addressed at three main frontiers. The first is patients centered for proper understanding and decision making; the second is directed toward health care professionals, including clinical decision support and clarity of roles; and the third addresses resources of health care systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing KT requires developing strategies to enhance awareness and promote behavioral changes congruent with research evidence, designing a systematic approach by health care providers and stakeholders to achieve patient-centered care.

Demand for Precision Medicine: A Discrete-Choice Experiment and External Validation Study

BACKGROUND

A limited evidence base and lack of clear clinical guidelines challenge healthcare systems' adoption of precision medicine. The effect of these conditions on demand is not understood.

OBJECTIVE

This research estimated the public's preferences and demand for precision medicine outcomes.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment survey was conducted with an online sample of the US public who had recent healthcare experience. Statistical analysis was undertaken using an error components mixed logit model. The responsiveness of demand in the context of a changing evidence base was estimated through the price elasticity of demand. External validation was examined using real-world demand for the 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer.

RESULTS

In total, 1124 (of 1849) individuals completed the web-based survey. The most important outcomes were survival gains with statistical uncertainty, cost of testing, and medical expert agreement on changing care based on test results. The value ($US, year 2017 values) for a test where most (vs. few) experts agreed to changing treatment based on test results was $US1100 (95% confidence interval [CI] 916-1286). Respondents were willing to pay $US265 (95% CI 46-486) for a test that could result in greater certainty around life-expectancy gains. The predicted demand of the assay was 9% in 2005 and 66% in 2014, compared with real-world uptake of 7% and 71% (root-mean-square prediction error 0.11). Demand was sensitive to price (1% increase in price resulted in > 1% change in demand) when first introduced and insensitive to price (1% increase in price resulted in < 0.1% change in demand) as the evidence base became established.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of external validity was found. Demand was weak and responsive to price in the near term because of uncertainty and an immature evidence base. Clear communication of precision medicine outcomes and uncertainty is crucial in allowing healthcare to align with individual preferences.

Informing Integration of Genomic Medicine Into Primary Care: An Assessment of Current Practice, Attitudes, and Desired Resources

Introduction: Preparing primary care providers for genomic medicine (GM) first requires assessment of their educational needs in order to provide clear, purposeful direction and justify educational activities. More understanding is needed about primary care providers’ perspectives on their role in newer areas of GM and what resources would be helpful in practice. Our objective was to determine family physicians’ (FP) current involvement and confidence in GM, attitudes regarding its clinical value, suggestions for integration of GM into practice, and resources and education required.

Methods: A self-complete anonymous questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 2,000 FPs in Ontario, Canada in September 2012.

Results: Adjusted response rate was 26% (361/1,365), mean age was 51, and 53% were male. FPs reported many aspects of traditional GM as part of current practice (eliciting family history: 93%; deciding who to refer to genetics: 94%; but few reported confidence (44%, 32% respectively). Newer areas of GM were not part of most FPs’ current practice and confidence was low (pharmacogenetics: 28% part of practice, 5% confident; direct-to-consumer genetic testing: 14%/2%; whole genome sequencing: 8%/2%). Attitudes were mixed with 59% agreeing that GM would improve patient health outcomes, 41% seeing benefits to genetic testing, but only 36% agreeing it was their responsibility to incorporate GM into practice. Few could identify useful sources of genetic information (22%) or find information about genetic tests (21%). Educational resources participants anticipated would be useful included contact information for local genetics clinics (89%), summaries of genetic disorders (86%), and genetic referral (85%) and testing (86%) criteria. About 58% were interested in learning about new genetic technologies. Most (76%) wanted to learn through in-person teaching (lectures, seminars etc.), 66% wanted contact with a local genetic counselor to answer questions, and 59% were interested in a genetics education website.

Conclusion: FPs lack confidence in GM skills needed for practice, particularly in emerging areas of GM. They see their role as making appropriate referrals, are somewhat optimistic about the contribution GM may make to patient care, but express caution about its current clinical benefits. There is a need for evidence-based educational resources integrated into primary care and improved communication with genetic specialists.

ARBoR: an identity and security solution for clinical reporting

MOTIVATION

Clinical genome sequencing laboratories return reports containing clinical testing results, signed by a board-certified clinical geneticist, to the ordering physician. This report is often a PDF, but can also be a paper copy or a structured data file. The reports are frequently modified and reissued due to changes in variant interpretation or clinical attributes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To precisely track report authenticity, we developed ARBoR (Authenticated Resources in a Hashed Block Registry), an application for tracking the authenticity and lineage of versioned clinical reports even when they are distributed as PDF or paper copies. ARBoR tracks clinical reports as cryptographically signed hash blocks in an electronic ledger file, which is then exactly replicated to many clients.

RESULTS

ARBoR was implemented for clinical reporting in the Human Genome Sequencing Center Clinical Laboratory, initially as part of the National Institute of Health's Electronic Medical Record and Genomics (eMERGE) project.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, we have issued 15 205 versioned clinical reports tracked by ARBoR. This system has provided us with a simple and tamper-proof mechanism for tracking clinical reports with a complicated update history.

Value of Collaboration among Multi-Domain Experts in Analysis of High-Throughput Genomics Data

The recent explosion and ease of access to large-scale genomics data is intriguing. However, serious obstacles exist to the optimal management of the entire spectrum from data production in the laboratory through bioinformatic analysis to statistical evaluation and ultimately clinical interpretation. Beyond the multitude of technical issues, what stands out the most is the absence of adequate communication among the specialists in these domains. Successful interdisciplinary collaborations along the genomics pipeline extending from laboratory experiments to bioinformatic analyses to clinical application are notable in large scale, well managed projects such as The Cancer Genome Atlas. However, in certain settings in which the various experts perform their specialized research activities in isolation, the siloed approach to their research contributes to the generation of questionable genomic interpretations. Such situations are particularly concerning when the ultimate endpoint involves genetic/genomic interpretations that are intended for clinical applications. In spite of the fact that clinicians express interest in gaining a better understanding of clinical genomic applications, the lack of communication from upstream experts leaves them with a serious level of discomfort in applying such genomic knowledge to patient care. This discomfort is especially evident among healthcare providers who are not trained as geneticists, in particular primary care physicians. We offer some initiatives that have potential to address this problem, with emphasis on improved and ongoing communication among all the experts in these fields, constituting a comprehensive genomic "pipeline" from laboratory to patient.

Genome Diagnostics: Novel Strategies for Measuring Value

Genetic testing technology is rapidly evolving with the growth of personalized medicine. While test evaluation typically relies on laboratory measures of performance, tests can be costly and analytically and ethically complex. A more fulsome consideration of value is warranted to inform adoption and appropriate use. Herein we describe a methodology for developing novel clinician- and patient-reported measures of clinical and personal utility, aiming to capture the informational value of genome diagnostic tests. Adhering to core measurement science principles and standards, our 4-step process includes (1) tool development through scoping reviews and stakeholder interviews and surveys; (2) tool validation through prospective cohort studies to establish construct validity, inter- and intra-rater reliability; (3) tool application using comparative effectiveness assessment to gauge the comparative value of different types of genetic tests; and (4) tool dissemination, leveraging existing partnerships with international stakeholders to spur additional validation studies, comparative effectiveness research, cost-effectiveness analysis, and evidence-informed policy. A scoping review of the clinical utility literature informed the development of a preliminary 25-item index. Qualitative interviews with 35 clinicians further informed the definition of our utility construct, item content, and item importance. Stakeholder surveys with 113 clinicians enabled further feedback on item content, importance, sensibility, response, and scoring options. An 18-item tool, the "Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx" (C-GUIDE), is now undergoing validation, while development work on the patient-reported measure of utility is underway. A methodologically innovative approach to the development of stakeholder-informed and clinimetrically sound measures of value for personalized medicine tests will assist technology users and decision makers globally. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grant (#PJT-152880) and the PhRMA Foundation Challenge Award. Publication of the study methodology or findings generated therein was not contingent on the sponsor's approval or censorship of the manuscript. The authors have nothing to disclose. Results from this study were presented as a poster at the 40th Annual North American Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making; October 14, 2018; Montreal, QC; the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics; October 18, 2018; San Diego, CA; and as an oral presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Health Services and Policy Research; May 31, 2018; Montreal, QC.

Preparing Medical Specialists to Practice Genomic Medicine: Education an Essential Part of a Broader Strategy

Developing a competent workforce will be crucial to realizing the promise of genomic medicine. The preparedness of medical specialists without specific genetic qualifications to play a role in this workforce has long been questioned, prompting widespread calls for education across the spectrum of medical training. Adult learning theory indicates that for education to be effective, a perceived need to learn must first be established. Medical specialists have to perceive genomic medicine as relevant to their clinical practice. Here, we review what is currently known about medical specialists’ perceptions of genomics, compare these findings to those from the genetics era, and identify areas for future research. Previous studies reveal that medical specialists’ views on the clinical utility of genomic medicine are mixed and are often tempered by several concerns. Specialists generally perceive their confidence and understanding to be lacking; subsequently, they welcome additional educational support, although specific needs are rarely detailed. Similar findings from the genetics era suggest that these challenges are not necessarily new but on a different scale and relevant to more specialties as genomic applications expand. While existing strategies developed for genetic education and training may be suitable for genomic education and training, investigating the educational needs of a wider range of specialties is critically necessary to determine if tailored approaches are needed and, if so, to facilitate these. Other interventions are also required to address some of the additional challenges identified in this review, and we encourage readers to see education as part of a broader implementation strategy.

ClinGen Variant Curation Expert Panel experiences and standardized processes for disease and gene-level specification of the ACMG/AMP guidelines for sequence variant interpretation

Genome-scale sequencing creates vast amounts of genomic data, increasing the challenge of clinical sequence variant interpretation. The demand for high-quality interpretation requires multiple specialties to join forces to accelerate the interpretation of sequence variant pathogenicity. With over 600 international members including clinicians, researchers, and laboratory diagnosticians, the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen), funded by the National Institutes of Health, is forming expert groups to systematically evaluate variants in clinically relevant genes. Here, we describe the first ClinGen variant curation expert panels (VCEPs), development of consistent and streamlined processes for establishing new VCEPs, and creation of standard operating procedures for VCEPs to define application of the ACMG/AMP guidelines for sequence variant interpretation in specific genes or diseases. Additionally, ClinGen has created user interfaces to enhance reliability of curation and a Sequence Variant Interpretation Working Group (SVI WG) to harmonize guideline specifications and ensure consistency between groups. The expansion of VCEPs represents the primary mechanism by which curation of a substantial fraction of genomic variants can be accelerated and ultimately undertaken systematically and comprehensively. We welcome groups to utilize our resources and become involved in our effort to create a publicly accessible, centralized resource for clinically relevant genes and variants.

Building evidence and measuring clinical outcomes for genomic medicine

Human genomic sequencing has potential diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic value across a wide breadth of clinical disciplines. One barrier to widespread adoption is the paucity of evidence for improved outcomes in patients who do not already have an indication for more focused testing. In this Series paper, we review clinical outcome studies in genomic medicine and discuss the important features and key challenges to building evidence for next generation sequencing in the context of routine patient care.

Opportunities, resources, and techniques for implementing genomics in clinical care

Advances in technologies for assessing genomic variation and an increasing understanding of the effects of genomic variants on health and disease are driving the transition of genomics from the research laboratory into clinical care. Genomic medicine, or the use of an individual's genomic information as part of their clinical care, is increasingly gaining acceptance in routine practice, including in assessing disease risk in individuals and their families, diagnosing rare and undiagnosed diseases, and improving drug safety and efficacy. We describe the major types and measurement tools of genomic variation that are currently of clinical importance, review approaches to interpreting genomic sequence variants, identify publicly available tools and resources for genomic test interpretation, and discuss several key barriers in using genomic information in routine clinical practice.

The development of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE): a novel strategy for measuring the clinical utility of genetic testing

Purpose

Clinical utility describes a genetic test’s value to patients, families, health-care providers, systems, or society. This study aims to define clinical utility from the perspective of clinicians and develop a novel outcome measure that operationalizes this concept.

Methods

Item selection for the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) was informed by a scoping review of the literature. Item reduction was guided by qualitative and quantitative feedback from semistructured interviews and a cross-sectional survey of genetics and nongenetics specialists. Final item selection, index scoring, and structure were guided by feedback from an expert panel of genetics professionals.

Results

A review of 194 publications informed the selection of a preliminary set of 25 items. Feedback from 35 semistructured interviews, 113 surveys, and 11 expert panelists informed the content and wording of C-GUIDE’s final set of 18 items that reflect on the utility of testing related to diagnosis, management, and familial/psychosocial impact. C-GUIDE achieves content and face validity for use in a range of diagnostic genetic testing settings.

Conclusion

Work to establish reliability and construct validity is underway. C-GUIDE will be useful in comparative studies to generate policy-relevant evidence pertaining to the clinical utility of genetic testing across a range of settings.

Pharmacogenomics-based practice in North Cyprus: its adoption by pharmacists and their attitudes and knowledge

Background Pharmacogenomics is a branch of biotechnological science integrating medicine, pharmacology, and genomics techniques. Moreover, it focuses on creating drug therapies in order to analyze genetic differences in patients causing various responses to a single therapeutic regimen. Objective This cross sectional study aimed to examine the attitude, knowledge and adoption among pharmacists in North Cyprus and the most appropriate method to improve education among them. Setting Community pharmacy setting. Method A total of 103 out of 140 pharmacists responded to a pre-tested and validated questionnaire consisting of 25 items during July through September 2016. Main outcome measure Pharmacists attitude, knowledge and adoption towards pharmacogenomic tests. Result Data showed that most of the pharmacists in North Cyprus had positive attitude and knowledge scores with mean value of 28.3 ± 5.3 (out of 40) and 6.9 ± 0.8 (out of 10) respectively, further findings showed that there is a significant difference among age groups in their total attitude score (p < 0.05). Conclusion Even though pharmacogenomics is a field promising a variety of benefits, it is vital to implement it in clinical settings in order to improve outcomes. Our findings highlight the necessity for more education on the availability and interpretation of pharmacogenomics tests.

Analysis of 51 proposed hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genes from genome sequencing data in sarcomere negative cases has negligible diagnostic yield

PURPOSE

Increasing numbers of genes are being implicated in Mendelian disorders and incorporated into clinical test panels. However, lack of evidence supporting the gene-disease relationship can hinder interpretation. We explored the utility of testing 51 additional genes for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), one of the most commonly tested Mendelian disorders.

METHODS

Using genome sequencing data from 240 sarcomere gene negative HCM cases and 6229 controls, we undertook case-control and individual variant analyses to assess 51 genes that have been proposed for HCM testing.

RESULTS

We found no evidence to suggest that rare variants in these genes are prevalent causes of HCM. One variant, in a single case, was categorized as likely to be pathogenic. Over 99% of variants were classified as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) and 54% of cases had one or more VUS.

CONCLUSION

For almost all genes, the gene-disease relationship could not be validated and lack of evidence precluded variant interpretation. Thus, the incremental diagnostic yield of extending testing was negligible, and would, we propose, be outweighed by problems that arise with a high rate of uninterpretable findings. These findings highlight the need for rigorous, evidence-based selection of genes for clinical test panels.

Qualitative study of system-level factors related to genomic implementation

PURPOSE

Research on genomic medicine integration has focused on applications at the individual level, with less attention paid to implementation within clinical settings. Therefore, we conducted a qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify system-level factors that played a role in implementation of genomic medicine within Implementing GeNomics In PracTicE (IGNITE) Network projects.

METHODS

Up to four study personnel, including principal investigators and study coordinators from each of six IGNITE projects, were interviewed using a semistructured interview guide that asked interviewees to describe study site(s), progress at each site, and factors facilitating or impeding project implementation. Interviews were coded following CFIR inner-setting constructs.

RESULTS

Key barriers included (1) limitations in integrating genomic data and clinical decision support tools into electronic health records, (2) physician reluctance toward genomic research participation and clinical implementation due to a limited evidence base, (3) inadequate reimbursement for genomic medicine, (4) communication among and between investigators and clinicians, and (5) lack of clinical and leadership engagement.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of genomic medicine is hindered by several system-level barriers to both research and practice. Addressing these barriers may serve as important facilitators for studying and implementing genomics in practice.

Patient-centered care and genomic medicine: A qualitative provider study in the military health system

The diagnostic and predictive information produced by genomic sequencing may impact medical management, and it is critical that providers and institutions are able to use this information appropriately for patient care. Guided by the patient-centered care model, we investigated provider perspectives of patient, provider, and system-level factors that could influence the implementation of genomic medicine within the integrated healthcare system of the US Department of Defense (DOD). The purpose of this study was to explore patient-centered care elements related to the application of genomic sequencing in a military healthcare facility to understand the current capability and key gaps for patient-centered genomic medicine. Twenty DOD healthcare providers were interviewed regarding their past experiences and future expectations of genetics and genomics. These semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed. All providers interviewed had some experience with genetics, but the level of experience varied greatly. Providers reported widely differing degrees of knowledge and confidence regarding genetics and about military-specific policies regarding genetics which varied by specialty. In addition, most providers stated that their department did not currently have the infrastructure to allow for the care of patients with secondary genetic findings, defined as genetic findings which are intentionally examined because of their importance to healthcare management, but are unrelated to the reason the individual underwent sequencing. This study reveals gaps in key elements of patient-centered care related to genomic medicine that may be helpful to address in future implementation efforts.

Comparing theory and non-theory based implementation approaches to improving referral practices in cancer genetics: a cluster randomised trial protocol

Background

Lynch syndrome (LS) is an inherited, cancer predisposition syndrome associated with an increased risk of colorectal, endometrial and other cancer types. Identifying individuals with LS allows access to cancer risk management strategies proven to reduce cancer incidence and improve survival. However, LS is underdiagnosed and genetic referral rates are poor. Improving LS referral is complex, and requires multisystem behaviour change. Although barriers have been identified, evidence-based strategies to facilitate behaviour change are lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of a theory-based implementation approach against a non-theory based approach for improving detection of LS amongst Australian patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

A two-arm parallel cluster randomised trial design will be used to compare two identical, structured implementation approaches, distinguished only by the use of theory to identify barriers and design targeted intervention strategies, to improve LS referral practices in eight large Australian hospital networks. Each hospital network will be randomly allocated to a trial arm, with stratification by state. A trained healthcare professional will lead the following phases at each site: (1) undertake baseline clinical practice audits, (2) form multidisciplinary Implementation Teams, (3) identify target behaviours for practice change, (4) identify barriers to change, (5) generate intervention strategies, (6) support staff to implement interventions and (7) evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention using post-implementation clinical data. The theoretical and non-theoretical components of each trial arm will be distinguished in phases 4–5. Study outcomes include a LS referral process map for each hospital network, with evaluation of the proportion of patients with risk-appropriate completion of the LS referral pathway within 2 months of CRC resection pre and post implementation.

Discussion

This trial will determine the more effective approach for improving the detection of LS amongst patients with CRC, whilst also advancing understanding of the impact of theory-based implementation approaches in complex health systems and the feasibility of training healthcare professionals to use them. Insights gained will guide the development of future interventions to improve LS identification on a larger scale and across different contexts, as well as efforts to address the gap between evidence and practice in the rapidly evolving field of genomic research.

Trial registration

ANZCTR, ACTRN12618001072202. Registered on 27 June 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3457-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Personalized medicine into health national services: barriers and potentialities

Research and innovation in personalized medicine (PM) are extensive and expanding, with several pharmacogenetic/pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing options currently available for a wide range of health problems. However, PGx-guided therapy faces many barriers to full integration into clinical practice and acceptance by practitioner/patient: utilization and uptake by payers in real-world practice are being discussed, and the criteria to guide clinicians and policy makers in PGx test selection are not fully incorporated. This review focuses on the advances of pharmacogenomics to individualize treatments, the relationship between pharmacogenetics and pharmacometabolomics, the new paradigm of the Big Data, the needs and barriers facing PGx clinical application and the situation of PGx testing in health national services. It is based on lectures presented by speakers of the European Society of Pharmacogenomics and Personalised Therapy (ESPT) Fourth Conference, held in Catania, October 4th, 2017.

Delivering genomic medicine in the United Kingdom National Health Service: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

We sought to assess the readiness of the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service to implement a Genomic Medicine Service. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify what is known about factors related to the implementation of genomic medicine in routine health care and to draw out the implications for the UK and other settings.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified in Web of Science and PubMed from their date of inception to April 2018. The review included primary research studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods, and systematic reviews. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies met our inclusion criteria. The majority of studies reviewed were conducted in the United States. We identified four domains: (1) systems, (2) training and workforce needs, (3) professional attitudes and values, and (4) the role of patients and the public.

CONCLUSION

Mainstreaming genomic medicine into routine clinical practice requires actions at each level of the health-care system. Our synthesis emphasized the organizational, social, and cultural implications of reforming practice, highlighting that demonstration of clinical utility and cost-effectiveness, attending to the compatibility of genomic medicine with clinical principles, and involving and engaging patients are key to successful implementation.

Healthcare professionals' attitudes toward cancer precision medicine: A systematic review

Use of precision medicine in oncology is burgeoning and can provide patients with new treatment options. However, it is not clear how precision medicine is impacting healthcare professionals (HCPs), particularly with regards to their concerns about this new approach. We therefore synthesized the existing literature on HCPs' attitudes toward cancer precision medicine. We searched four databases for relevant articles. Two reviewers screened eligible articles and extracted data. We assessed the quality of each article using the QualSyst tool. We found 22 articles, representing 4,321 HCPs (63.7% cancer specialists). HCPs held largely positive attitudes toward cancer precision medicine, including their capacity to facilitate treatment decisions and provide prognostic information. However, they also had concerns regarding costs, insurance coverage, limited HCP knowledge about precision medicine, potential misuse, difficulties accessing the tests, and delays in receiving test results. Most HCPs felt that test-related decisions should be shared between families and HCPs. HCPs intended to disclose actionable results but were less inclined to disclose negative/secondary findings. HCPs had a strong preference for genetic counselor involvement when disclosing germline findings. Most HCPs intended to use somatic and germline tests in their future practice but the extent to which pharmacogenomic tests will be used is uncertain. HCPs indicated that additional evidence supporting test utility and increased availability of treatment guidelines could facilitate the use of testing. HCPs held generally positive attitudes toward cancer precision medicine, however there were some key concerns. Addressing concerns early, devising educational support for HCPs and developing guidelines may facilitate the successful implementation of precision medicine trials in the future.

The Potential Role for Host Genetic Profiling in Screening for Chlamydia-Associated Tubal Factor Infertility (TFI)-New Perspectives

Host immunogenetic factors can affect late complications of urogenital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis. These findings are creating new avenues for updating existing risk prediction models for C. trachomatis-associated tubal factor infertility (TFI). Research into host factors and its utilization may therefore have future implications for diagnosing C. trachomatis-induced infertility. We outline the epidemiological situation regarding C. trachomatis and TFI in high-income countries. Thereupon, we review the main characteristics of the population undergoing fertility work-up and identify screening and diagnostic strategies for TFI currently in place. The Netherlands is an exemplary model for the state of the art in high-income countries. Within the framework of existing clinical approaches, we propose a scenario for the translation of relevant genome-based information into triage of infertile women, with the objective of implementing genetic profiling in the routine investigation of TFI. Furthermore, we describe the state of the art in relevant gene- and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) based clinical prediction models and place our perspectives in the context of these applications. We conclude that the introduction of a genetic test of proven validity into the assessment of TFI should help reduce patient burden from invasive and costly examinations by achieving a more precise risk stratification.

Interpretations of the Term "Actionable" when Discussing Genetic Test Results: What you Mean Is Not What I Heard

In genomic medicine, the familiarity and inexactness of the term "actionable" can lead to multiple interpretations and mistaken beliefs about realistic treatment options. As part of a larger study focusing on public attitudes toward policies for the return of secondary genomic results, we looked at how members of the lay public interpret the term "medically actionable" in the context of genetic testing. We also surveyed a convenience sample of oncologists as part of a separate study and asked them to define the term "medically actionable." After being provided with a definition of the term, 21 out of 60 (35%) layperson respondents wrote an additional action not specified in the provided definition (12 mentioned "cure" and 9 mentioned environment or behavioral change) and 17 (28%) indicated "something can be done" with no action specified. In contrast, 52 surveyed oncologists did not mention environment, behavioral change, or cure. Based on our findings, we propose that rather than using the term "actionable" alone, providers should also say "what they mean" to reduce miscommunication and confusion that could negatively impact medical decision-making. Lastly, to guide clinicians during patient- provider discussion about genetic test results, we provide examples of phrasing to facilitate clearer communication and understanding of the term "actionable."

Much ado about nothing: A qualitative study of the experiences of an average-risk population receiving results of exome sequencing

The increasing availability of exome sequencing to the general ("healthy") population raises questions about the implications of genomic testing for individuals without suspected Mendelian diseases. Little is known about this population's motivations for undergoing exome sequencing, their expectations, reactions, and perceptions of utility. In order to address these questions, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 participants recruited from a longitudinal multi-omics profiling study that included exome sequencing. Participants were interviewed after receiving exome results, which included Mendelian disease-associated pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants, pharmacogenetic variants, and risk assessments for multifactorial diseases such as type 2 diabetes. The primary motivation driving participation in exome sequencing was personal curiosity. While they reported feeling validation and relief, participants were frequently underwhelmed by the results and described having expected more from exome sequencing. All participants reported discussing the results with at least some family, friends, and healthcare providers. Participants' recollection of the results returned to them was sometimes incorrect or incomplete, in many cases aligning with their perceptions of their health risks when entering the study. These results underscore the need for different genetic counseling approaches for generally healthy patients undergoing exome sequencing, in particular the need to provide anticipatory guidance to moderate participants' expectations. They also provide a preview of potential challenges clinicians may face as genomic sequencing continues to scale-up in the general population despite a lack of full understanding of its impact.

Healthcare System Priorities for Successful Integration of Genomics: An Australian Focus

This paper examines key considerations for the successful integration of genomic technologies into healthcare systems. All healthcare systems strive to introduce new technologies that are effective and affordable, but genomics offers particular challenges, given the rapid evolution of the technology. In this context we frame internationally relevant discussion points relating to effective and sustainable implementation of genomic testing within the strategic priority areas of the recently endorsed Australian National Health Genomics Policy Framework. The priority areas are services, data, workforce, finances, and person-centred care. In addition, we outline recommendations from a government perspective through the lens of the Australian health system, and argue that resources should be allocated not to just genomic testing alone, but across the five strategic priority areas for full effectiveness.

S. Dawkins H, Nowak KJ, Weeramanthri TS. Genomic Testing for Human Health and Disease Across the Life Cycle: Applications and Ethical, Legal, and Social Challenges

The expanding use of genomic technologies encompasses all phases of life, from the embryo to the elderly, and even the posthumous phase. In this paper, we present the spectrum of genomic healthcare applications, and describe their scope and challenges at different stages of the life cycle. The integration of genomic technology into healthcare presents unique ethical issues that challenge traditional aspects of healthcare delivery. These challenges include the different definitions of utility as applied to genomic information; the particular characteristics of genetic data that influence how it might be protected, used and shared; and the difficulties applying existing models of informed consent, and how new consent models might be needed.

Psychosocial, attitudinal, and demographic correlates of cancer-related germline genetic testing in the 2017 Health Information National Trends Survey

The study objective was to examine bivariate and multivariate associations among worry, perceptions, attitudes, sociodemographics, and uptake of cancer-related germline genetic testing. We used data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (cycle 5.1), administered (January-May 2017) to a nationally representative sample of non-institutionalized adults (n = 3285). Those who had "heard about genetic tests that determine how a disease can be treated" had a higher likelihood of Lynch syndrome and BRCA1/2 testing (aRR = 2.57, p < 0.01; aRR = 3.23, p < 0.04). Attitudinal and psychosocial variables were not associated with uptake. Future research should explore ways to educate the public about the potential use of genetics in treatment decision-making.

Leveraging Implementation Science to Address Health Disparities in Genomic Medicine: Examples from the Field

The integration of genomic data into screening, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment for clinical and public health practices has been slow and challenging. Implementation science can be applied in tackling the barriers and challenges as well as exploring opportunities and best practices for integrating genomic data into routine clinical and public health practice.In this article, we define the state of disparities in genomic medicine and focus predominantly on late-stage research findings. We use case studies from genetic testing for cardiovascular diseases (familial hypercholesterolemia) and cancer (Lynch syndrome and hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome) in high-risk populations to consider current disparities and related barriers in turning genomic advances into population health impact to advance health equity. Finally, we address how implementation science can address these translational barriers and we discuss the strategic importance of collaborative multi-stakeholder approaches that engage public health agencies, professional societies, academic health and research centers, community clinics, and patients and their families to work collectively to improve population health and reduce or eliminate health inequities.

Patient-provider communications about pharmacogenomic results increase patient recall of medication changes

Effective doctor-patient communication is critical for disease management, especially when considering genetic information. We studied patient-provider communications after implementing a point-of-care pharmacogenomic results delivery system to understand whether pharmacogenomic results are discussed and whether medication recall is impacted. Outpatients undergoing preemptive pharmacogenomic testing (cases), non-genotyped controls, and study providers were surveyed from October 2012-May 2017. Patient responses were compared between visits where pharmacogenomic results guided prescribing versus visits where pharmacogenomics did not guide prescribing. Provider knowledge of pharmacogenomics, before and during study participation, was also analyzed. Both providers and case patients frequently reported discussions of genetic results after visits where pharmacogenomic information guided prescribing. Importantly, medication changes from visits where pharmacogenomics influenced prescribing were more often recalled than non-pharmacogenomic guided medication changes (OR=3.3 [1.6–6.7], p=0.001). Case patients who had separate visits where pharmacogenomics did and did not respectively influence prescribing more often remembered medication changes from visits where genomic-based guidance was used (OR=3.4 [1.2–9.3], p=0.02). Providers also displayed dramatic increases in personal genomic understanding through program participation (94% felt at least somewhat informed about pharmacogenomics post-participation, compared to 61% at baseline, p=0.04). Using genomic information during prescribing increases patient-provider communications, patient medication recall, and provider understanding of genomics, important ancillary benefits to clinical use of pharmacogenomics.

Pharmacogenetic testing in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA): policy recommendations from the VHA Clinical Pharmacogenetics Subcommittee

PURPOSE

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Clinical Pharmacogenetics Subcommittee is charged with making recommendations about whether specific pharmacogenetic tests should be used in healthcare at VHA facilities. We describe a process to inform VHA pharmacogenetic testing policy.

METHODS

After developing consensus definitions of clinical validity and utility, the Subcommittee identified salient drug-gene pairs with potential clinical application in VHA. Members met monthly to discuss each drug-gene pair, the evidence of clinical utility for the associated pharmacogenetic test, and any VHA-specific testing considerations. The Subcommittee classified each test as strongly recommended, recommended, or not routinely recommended before drug initiation.

RESULTS

Of 30 drug-gene pair tests reviewed, the Subcommittee classified 4 (13%) as strongly recommended, including HLA-B*15:02 for carbamazepine-associated Stevens-Johnston syndrome and G6PD for rasburicase-associated hemolytic anemia; 12 (40%) as recommended, including CYP2D6 for codeine toxicity; and 14 (47%) as not routinely recommended, such as CYP2C19 for clopidogrel dosing.

CONCLUSION

Only half of drug-gene pairs with high clinical validity received Subcommittee support for policy promoting their widespread use across VHA. The Subcommittee generally found insufficient evidence of clinical utility or available, effective alternative strategies for the remainders. Continual evidence review and rigorous outcomes research will help promote the translation of pharmacogenetic discovery to healthcare.

Views Of Primary Care Providers On Testing Patients For Genetic Risks For Common Chronic Diseases

We surveyed 488 primary care providers in community and academic practices in New York City in the period 2014-16 about their views on genetic testing for chronic diseases. The majority of the providers, most of whom were current or recent physicians in training, had had formal genetics education and had positive views of the utility of genetic testing. However, they felt unprepared to work with patients at high risk for genetic conditions and were not confident about interpreting test results. Many were concerned that genetic testing might lead to insurance discrimination and lacked trust in companies that offer genetic tests. These findings point to some of the attitudes and knowledge gaps among the providers that should be considered in the clinical implementation of genomic medicine for chronic conditions. Enhanced training, guidelines, clinical tools, and awareness of patient protections might support the effective adoption of genomic medicine by primary care providers.

A content analysis of the views of genetics professionals on race, ancestry, and genetics

Over the past decade, the proliferation of genetic studies on human health and disease has reinvigorated debates about the appropriate role of race and ancestry in research and clinical care. Here we report on the responses of genetics professionals to a survey about their views on race, genetics, and ancestry across the domains of science, medicine, and society. Through a qualitative content analysis of free-text comments from 515 survey respondents, we identified key themes pertaining to multiple meanings of race, the use of race as a proxy for genetic ancestry, and the relevance of race and ancestry to health. Our findings suggest that for many genetics professionals the questions of what race is and what race means remain both professionally and personally contentious. Looking ahead as genomics is translated into the practice of precision medicine and as learning health care systems offer continued improvements in care through integrated research, we argue for nuanced considerations of both race and genetic ancestry across research and care settings.

Integrating Genomics into Healthcare: A Global Responsibility

Genomic sequencing is rapidly transitioning into clinical practice, and implementation into healthcare systems has been supported by substantial government investment, totaling over US$4 billion, in at least 14 countries. These national genomic-medicine initiatives are driving transformative change under real-life conditions while simultaneously addressing barriers to implementation and gathering evidence for wider adoption. We review the diversity of approaches and current progress made by national genomic-medicine initiatives in the UK, France, Australia, and US and provide a roadmap for sharing strategies, standards, and data internationally to accelerate implementation.

High-frequency actionable pathogenic exome variants in an average-risk cohort

Exome sequencing is increasingly utilized in both clinical and nonclinical settings, but little is known about its utility in healthy individuals. Most previous studies on this topic have examined a small subset of genes known to be implicated in human disease and/or have used automated pipelines to assess pathogenicity of known variants. To determine the frequency of both medically actionable and nonactionable but medically relevant exome findings in the general population we assessed the exomes of 70 participants who have been extensively characterized over the past several years as part of a longitudinal integrated multiomics profiling study. We analyzed exomes by identifying rare likely pathogenic and pathogenic variants in genes associated with Mendelian disease in the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) database. We then used American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) guidelines for the classification of rare sequence variants. Additionally, we assessed pharmacogenetic variants. Twelve out of 70 (17%) participants had medically actionable findings in Mendelian disease genes. Five had phenotypes or family histories associated with their genetic variants. The frequency of actionable variants is higher than that reported in most previous studies and suggests added benefit from utilizing expanded gene lists and manual curation to assess actionable findings. A total of 63 participants (90%) had additional nonactionable findings, including 60 who were found to be carriers for recessive diseases and 21 who have increased Alzheimer's disease risk because of heterozygous or homozygous APOE e4 alleles (18 participants had both). Our results suggest that exome sequencing may have considerably more utility for health management in the general population than previously thought.

Toward greater understanding of patient decision-making around genome sequencing

In the era of next-generation sequencing, it is essential to collect and understand the patient outcomes that result from this new technology. One critical determinant of these is the process by which individuals first decide whether and how to pursue genome sequencing. In this perspective article, we examine the literature on adult patient decision-making in genome sequencing and identify current research gaps to address. Several studies have explored the motivations and concerns of patients undergoing sequencing; less attention has been paid to those who decline sequencing or to individuals from lower socioeconomic groups. Many factors that might play a role in the decision to pursue or decline sequencing, including trust, family dynamics and barriers to access, have yet to be explored fully. Future research that captures the experience of the wider population will produce a more generalizable understanding of the clinical, psychosocial, and economic outcomes of pursuing or declining sequencing.

Genomic Interventions in Medicine

Lately, the term "genomics" has become ubiquitous in many scientific articles. It is a rapidly growing aspect of the biomedical sciences that studies the genome. The human genome contains a torrent of information that gives clues about human origin, evolution, biological function, and diseases. In a bid to demystify the workings of the genome, the Human Genome Project (HGP) was initiated in 1990, with the chief goal of sequencing the approximately 3 billion nucleotide base pairs of the human DNA. Since its completion in 2003, the HGP has opened new avenues for the application of genomics in clinical practice. This review attempts to overview some milestone discoveries that paved way for the initiation of the HGP, remarkable revelations from the HGP, and how genomics is influencing a paradigm shift in routine clinical practice. It further highlights the challenges facing the implementation of genomic medicine, particularly in Africa. Possible solutions are also discussed.

Role of Germline Genetics in Identifying Survivors at Risk for Adverse Effects of Cancer Treatment

The growing population of cancer survivors often faces adverse effects of treatment, which have a substantial impact on morbidity and mortality. Although certain adverse effects are thought to have a significant heritable component, much work remains to be done to understand the role of germline genetic factors in the development of treatment-related toxicities. In this article, we review current understanding of genetic susceptibility to a range of adverse outcomes among cancer survivors (e.g., fibrosis, urinary and rectal toxicities, ototoxicity, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, subsequent malignancies). Most previous research has been narrowly focused, investigating variation in candidate genes and pathways such as drug metabolism, DNA damage and repair, and inflammation. Few of the findings from these earlier candidate gene studies have been replicated in independent populations. Advances in understanding of the genome, improvements in technology, and reduction in laboratory costs have led to recent genome-wide studies, which agnostically interrogate common and/or rare variants across the entire genome. Larger cohorts of patients with homogeneous treatment exposures and systematic ascertainment of well-defined outcomes as well as replication in independent study populations are essential aspects of the study design and are increasingly leading to the discovery of variants associated with each of the adverse outcomes considered in this review. In the long-term, validated germline genetic associations hold tremendous promise for more precisely identifying patients at highest risk for developing adverse treatment effects, with implications for frontline therapy decision-making, personalization of long-term follow-up guidelines, and potential identification of targets for prevention or treatment of the toxicity.

Perceptions of students in health and molecular life sciences regarding pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence is demonstrating that a patient's unique genetic profile can be used to detect the disease's onset, prevent its progression, and optimize its treatment. This led to the increased global efforts to implement personalized medicine (PM) and pharmacogenomics (PG) in clinical practice. Here we investigated the perceptions of students from different universities in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH) towards PG/PM as well as related ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI). This descriptive, cross-sectional study is based on the survey of 559 students from the Faculties of Medicine, Pharmacy, Health Studies, Genetics, and Bioengineering and other study programs.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 50% of students heard about personal genome testing companies and 69% consider having a genetic test done. A majority of students (57%) agreed that PM represents a promising healthcare model, and 40% of students agreed that their study program is well designed for understanding PG/PM. This latter opinion seems to be particularly influenced by the field of study (7.23, CI 1.99-26.2, p = 0.003). Students with this opinion are also more willing to continue their postgraduate education in the PM (OR = 4.68, CI 2.59-8.47, p < 0.001). Furthermore, 45% of students are aware of different ethical aspects of genetic testing, with most of them (46%) being concerned about the patient's privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate a positive attitude of biomedical students in Bosnia and Herzegovina towards genetic testing and personalized medicine. Importantly, our results emphasize the key importance of pharmacogenomic education for more efficient translation of precision medicine into clinical practice.

Stakeholders' views on the value of outcomes from clinical genetic and genomic interventions

PURPOSE

Robust evidence about the value of clinical genomic interventions (CGIs), such as genetic/genomic testing or clinical genetic evaluation, is limited. We obtained stakeholders' perspectives on outcomes from CGIs to help inform their value.

METHODS

We used an adapted Delphi expert panel process. Two anonymous survey rounds assessed the value of 44 CGI outcomes and whether a third party should pay for them, with discussion in between rounds.

RESULTS

Sixty-six panelists responded to the first-round survey and 60 to the second. Policy-makers/payers gave the lowest ratings for value and researchers gave the highest. Patients/consumers had the most uncertainty about value and payment by a third party. Uncertainty about value was observed when evidence of proven health benefit was lacking, potential harms outweighed benefits for reproductive outcomes, and outcomes had only personal utility for individuals or family members. Agreement about outcomes for which a third party should not pay included prevention through surgery with unproven health benefits, establishing ancestry, parental consanguinity, and paternity.

CONCLUSION

Research is needed to understand factors contributing to uncertainty and stakeholder differences about the value of CGI outcomes. Reaching consensus will accelerate the creation of metrics to generate the evidence needed to inform value and guide policies that promote availability, uptake, and coverage of CGIs.

Current landscape of personalized medicine adoption and implementation in Southeast Asia

BACKGROUND

The emergence of personalized medicine (PM) has raised some tensions in healthcare systems. PM is expensive and health budgets are constrained - efficient healthcare delivery is therefore critical. Notwithstanding the cost, many countries have started to adopt this novel technology, including resource-limited Southeast Asia (SEA) countries. This study aimed to describe the status of PM adoption in SEA, highlight the challenges and to propose strategies for future development.

METHODS

The study included scoping review and key stakeholder interviews in four focus countries - Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. The current landscape of PM adoption was evaluated based on an assessment framework of six key themes - healthcare system, governance, access, awareness, implementation, and data. Six PM programs were evaluated for their financing and implementation mechanisms.

RESULTS

The findings revealed SEA has progressed in adopting PM especially Singapore and Thailand. A regional pharmacogenomics research network has been established. However, PM policies and programs vary significantly. As most PM programs are champion-driven and the available funding is limited, the current PM distribution has the potential to widen existing health disparities. Low PM awareness in the society and the absence of political support with financial investment are fundamental barriers. There is a clear need to broaden opportunities for critical discourse about PM especially for policymakers. Multi-stakeholder, multi-country strategies need to be prioritized in order to leverage resources and expertise.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting PM remains in its infancy in SEA. To achieve an effective PM adoption, it is imperative to balance equity issues across diverse populations while improving efficiency in healthcare.

Impact of SLCO1B1 Pharmacogenetic Testing on Patient and Healthcare Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Demonstrated improvements in patient outcomes will facilitate the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetic testing. Using the association between solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1) and statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMSs) as a model, we conducted a systematic review of patient outcomes after delivery of SLCO1B1 results. Using PubMed and Embase searches through December 19, 2017, we identified 37 eligible records reporting preliminary or final outcomes, including six studies delivering only SLCO1B1 results and five large healthcare system-based implementation projects of multipharmacogene panels. Two small trials have demonstrated at least short-term improvements in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol after SLCO1B1 testing among previously statin intolerant patients. Evidence from large implementation projects suggests that SLCO1B1 results may change prescribing patterns for some high-risk patients. No study has reported improvements in SAMSs or cardiovascular events or tracked the economic outcomes of SLCO1B1 testing. Ongoing studies should collect and report outcomes relevant to pharmacogenetics stakeholders.

A Need for Better Understanding Is the Major Determinant for Public Perceptions of Human Gene Editing

The CRISPR/Cas system could provide an efficient and reliable means of editing the human genome and has the potential to revolutionize modern medicine; however, rapid developments are raising complex ethical issues. There has been significant scientific debate regarding the acceptability of some applications of CRISPR/Cas, with leaders in the field highlighting the need for the lay public's views to shape expert discussion. As such, we sought to determine the factors that influence public opinion on gene editing. We created a 17-item online survey translated into 11 languages and advertised worldwide. Topic modeling was used to analyze textual responses to determine what factors influenced respondents' opinions toward human somatic or embryonic gene editing, and how this varied among respondents with differing attitudes and demographic backgrounds. A total of 3,988 free-text responses were analyzed. Respondents had a mean age of 32 (range, 11-90) years, and 37% were female. The most prevalent topics cited were Future Generations, Research, Human Editing, Children, and Health. Respondents who disagreed with gene editing for health-related purposes were more likely to cite the topic Better Understanding than those who agreed to both somatic and embryonic gene editing. Respondents from Western backgrounds more frequently discussed Future Generations, compared with participants from Eastern countries. Religious respondents did not cite the topic Religious Beliefs more frequently than did nonreligious respondents, whereas Christian respondents were more likely to cite the topic Future Generations. Our results suggest that public resistance to human somatic or embryonic gene editing does not stem from an inherent mistrust of genome modification, but rather a desire for greater understanding. Furthermore, we demonstrate that factors influencing public opinion vary greatly amongst demographic groups. It is crucial that the determinants of public attitudes toward CRISPR/Cas be well understood so that the technology does not suffer the negative public sentiment seen with previous genetic biotechnologies.