Association of No-Cost Genetic Testing Program Implementation and Patient Characteristics With Access to Genetic Testing for Inherited Retinal Degenerations

Racial Disparities in Genetic Detection Rates for Inherited Retinal Diseases

Importance

The association of race and detection of pathogenic variants using wide-panel genetic testing for inherited retinal diseases (IRD), to our knowledge, has not been studied previously.

Objective

To investigate the genetic detection rates of wide-panel testing in Black and non-Hispanic White patients with IRDs.

Design, Setting, Participants

This 2-group comparison used retrospective patient data that were collected at the University of Michigan (UM) and Blueprint Genetics (BG). At UM, inclusion criteria included having a clinical IRD diagnosis, wide-panel genetic testing, and both parents and the patient self-identifying as the same race (Black or non-Hispanic White). Logistic regression analysis was used; the dependent variable was genetic test result (positive or negative/inconclusive) and the independent variables were race, age, sex, phenotype, and number of genes tested. In the BG database, patients with wide-panel testing and self-reported race were included; detection rate comparison analysis based on race was performed using χ2 test of independence. These data were analyzed from October 30, 2013, through October 26, 2022.

Main Outcome and Measure

Genetic test result was considered positive if pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were detected.

Results

A total of 572 patients were included in UM, 295 were males (51.6%). Mean age was 45 years. There were 54 Black patients (9.4%) and 518 White patients (90.6%). Black race (odds ratio [OR], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.46; P < .001) and age (OR per 10 years, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.92; P < .001) were independently associated with decreased odds of a positive test. In the BG database, 142 of 320 of Black patients (44.4%) had a positive/likely positive test result, a proportion lower than White patients (1691 of 2931 [57.7%]) (χ2 = 18.65; df = 1; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Results from this study highlight a lower genetic detection rate for Black patients than for White patients with IRDs. This supports a concern that the current development of IRD therapeutics is highly dependent on the ability to identify the genetic cause of disease. Patients with no known genetic diagnosis may be disadvantaged in terms of prognostication, inheritance counseling, reproductive decision-making, and eligibility for potential therapeutic options, including clinical trials. As future treatments become available, these findings suggest the need to examine the genetic detection rates across majority and minority subgroups alike.

Next generation of free? Points to consider when navigating sponsored genetic testing

Genetics has been integrated into patient care across many subspecialties. However, genetic and genomic testing (GT) remain expensive with disparities in access both within Canada and internationally. It is, therefore, not surprising that sponsored GT has emerged as one alternative. Sponsored GT, for the purpose of this document, refers to clinical-grade GT partially or fully subsidised by industry. In return, industry sponsors-usually pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies-may have access to patients' genetic data, practitioner information, DNA and/or other information. The availability of sponsored GT options in the Canadian healthcare landscape has appeared to simplify patient and practitioner access to GT, but the potential ethical and legal considerations, as well as the nuances of a publicly funded healthcare system, must also be considered. This document offers preliminary guidance for Canadian healthcare practitioners encountering sponsored GT in practice. Further research and dialogue is urgently needed to explore this issue to provide fulsome considerations that one must be aware of when availing such options.

Patient experiences and perceived value of genetic testing in inherited retinal diseases: a cross-sectional survey

This study evaluated patient experiences with genetic testing for inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) and the association between underlying knowledge, testing outcomes, and the perceived value of the results. An online survey was distributed to adults with IRDs and parents/guardians of dependents with IRDs who had had genetic testing. Data included details of genetic testing, pre- and post- test perceptions, Decision Regret Scale, perceived value of results, and knowledge of gene therapy. Of 135 responses (85% from adults with IRDs), genetic testing was primarily conducted at no charge through public hospitals (49%) or in a research setting (30%). Key motivations for genetic testing were to confirm IRD diagnosis and to contribute towards research. Those who had received a genetic diagnosis (odds ratio: 6.71; p < 0.001) and those self-reported to have good knowledge of gene therapy (odds ratio: 2.69; p = 0.018) were more likely to have gained confidence in managing their clinical care. For over 80% of respondents, knowing the causative gene empowered them to learn more about their IRD and explore opportunities regarding clinical trials. Key genetic counselling information needs include resources for family communications, structured information provision, and ongoing genetic support, particularly in the context of emerging ocular therapies, to enhance consistency in information uptake.

Highly efficient capture approach for the identification of diverse inherited retinal disorders

Our study presents a 319-gene panel targeting inherited retinal dystrophy (IRD) genes. Through a multi-center retrospective cohort study, we validated the assay's effectiveness and clinical utility and characterized the mutation spectrum of Taiwanese IRD patients. Between January 2018 and May 2022, 493 patients in 425 unrelated families, all initially suspected of having IRD without prior genetic diagnoses, underwent detailed ophthalmic and physical examinations (with extra-ocular features recorded) and genetic testing with our customized panel. Disease-causing variants were identified by segregation analysis and clinical interpretation, with validation via Sanger sequencing. We achieved a read depth of >200× for 94.2% of the targeted 1.2 Mb region. 68.5% (291/425) of the probands received molecular diagnoses, with 53.9% (229/425) resolved cases. Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is the most prevalent initial clinical impression (64.2%), and 90.8% of the cohort have the five most prevalent phenotypes (RP, cone-rod syndrome, Usher's syndrome, Leber's congenital amaurosis, Bietti crystalline dystrophy). The most commonly mutated genes of probands that received molecular diagnosis are USH2A (13.7% of the cohort), EYS (11.3%), CYP4V2 (4.8%), ABCA4 (4.5%), RPGR (3.4%), and RP1 (3.1%), collectively accounted for 40.8% of diagnoses. We identify 87 unique unreported variants previously not associated with IRD and refine clinical diagnoses for 21 patients (7.22% of positive cases). We developed a customized gene panel and tested it on the largest Taiwanese cohort, showing that it provides excellent coverage for diverse IRD phenotypes.

Disparities in Inherited Retinal Degenerations

To review disparities in the field of inherited retinal degenerations to establish foundations for future discussions oriented toward finding possible solutions. A narrative overview of the literature. Despite collective efforts towards democratization of genetic testing and investigation, genetic databases containing primarily European populations are heavily relied upon. Access to specialized care and other resources is also still not available to all. Recognizing and addressing disparities and inequities within the field of inherited retinal degenerations will improve our care of these patients and our knowledge of their conditions.

Utility of No-Charge Panel Genetic Testing for Inherited Retinal Diseases in a Real-World Clinical Setting

PURPOSE

To show the utility of genetic testing in inherited retinal disease (IRD) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was performed at a single academic center and comprised 59 patients clinically diagnosed with IRD who had testing via the Invitae IRD Panel (Invitae Corp). Samples were collected from August 2019 to April 2021. The rates of genetic diagnosis and disease-category specific results (ie, positive, undetermined, negative) were assessed.

RESULTS

Testing results were returned a mean of 20 days (range, 14-28 days) after submission. Of the samples, 50.8% (30/59) had a diagnostic yield. By disease category, the yield was 46.4% (13/28) nonsyndromic retinitis pigmentosa (RP), 50.0% (4/8) syndromic RP, 46.2% (6/13) macular dystrophies, 75.0% (3/4) cone or cone-rod dystrophies, and 80.0% (4/5) other retinopathies; there were no cases of rod dystrophies. The results were undetermined in 47.5% of patients (28/59) because of identification of only 1 recessive mutation (5.1%; 3/59), 1 recessive mutation and at least 1 variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (13.6%; 8/59), or VUS only (28.8%; 17/59). One patient (1.7%) received negative testing results with no mutations or VUS identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Open-access, no-charge panel testing offers a reasonable diagnostic yield. Accurate clinical diagnosis of IRD before testing and acknowledgment of the limitations of panel testing are critical. The results add to the current estimates of the value of genetic testing for retina specialists in the management of IRD.

The current state of genetic testing platforms for inherited retinal diseases

PURPOSE

To evaluate genetic testing platforms used to aid in the diagnosis of inherited retinal degenerations (IRDs).

DESIGN

Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology SUBJECTS: Targeted genetic panel testing for IRDs METHODS, INTERVENTION, OR TESTING: Data collected regarding targeted genetic panel testing for IRDs offered by different labs were investigated for inclusion of coding and non-coding variants in disease genes. Both large IRD panels and smaller, more focused disease specific panels were included in the analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of disease genes tested as well as the commonality and uniqueness across testing platforms in both coding and non-coding variants of disease.

RESULTS

Across the three IRD panel tests investigated, 409 unique genes are represented, of which 269 genes are tested by all three panels. The top 20 genes known to cause over 70% of all IRDs are represented in the 269 common genes tested by all three panels. In addition, 138 non-coding variants are assayed across the three platforms in 50 unique genes. Focused disease specific panels exhibited significant variability across 5 testing platforms that were studied.

CONCLUSIONS

Ordering genetic testing for IRDs is not straightforward, as evidenced by the multitude of panels available to providers. It is important that there is coverage of both coding and non-coding regions in IRD genes to offer a diagnosis in these patients. This paper details the diversity of testing platforms currently available to clinicians and provides a thorough explanation of genes tested in the different IRD panels. In a time of increased importance for clinical genetic testing of IRD patients, knowledge of the proper test to order is paramount.