Genetic counseling for congenital heart disease - Practice resource of the national society of genetic counselors

Is there an increased risk of genetic abnormalities in fetuses with congenital heart disease in the setting of growth restriction?

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the presence of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is associated with an increased risk of genetic abnormalities in the setting of congenital heart disease (CHD).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study involving pregnancies that met the following criteria: (i) prenatal diagnosis of CHD, (ii) singleton live-birth, and (iii) genetic testing was performed either pre- or postnatally. Genetic results were reviewed by a clinical geneticist for updated variant classification. Fetal growth was stratified as appropriate for gestational age (AGA) or FGR.

RESULTS

Of the total of 445 fetuses that met the study criteria, 325 (73.0%) were AGA and 120 (27.0%) were FGR. Genetic abnormalities were detected in 131 (29.4%) pregnancies. There was a higher rate of genetic abnormalities (36.7% vs. 26.8%, p = 0.04), which was driven by aneuploidies (20.8% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.0006) in the FGR population. Early onset growth restriction was associated with a higher rate of genetic abnormalities (44.5% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.03). The rate of genetic abnormalities was significantly higher in the shunt category as compared to remainder of the cardiac anomalies (62.5% in shunt lesions vs. 24.7%, p < 0.00001). The rates of FGR (40.9% vs. 21.4%, p < 0.0001) and genetic abnormalities (52% vs. 20.4%, p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in the presence of extra-cardiac anomalies (ECA).

CONCLUSION

The presence of FGR in fetal CHD population was associated with underlying genetic abnormalities, specifically aneuploidies. Patients should be appropriately counseled regarding the higher likelihood of a genetic condition in the presence of FGR, early onset FGR, shunt lesions and ECA.

Clinical Risk Assessment and Prediction in Congenital Heart Disease Across the Lifespan: JACC Scientific Statement

Congenital heart disease (CHD) comprises a range of structural anomalies, each with a unique natural history, evolving treatment strategies, and distinct long-term consequences. Current prediction models are challenged by generalizability, limited validation, and questionable application to extended follow-up periods. In this JACC Scientific Statement, we tackle the difficulty of risk measurement across the lifespan. We appraise current and future risk measurement frameworks and describe domains of risk specific to CHD. Risk of adverse outcomes varies with age, sex, genetics, era, socioeconomic status, behavior, and comorbidities as they evolve through the lifespan and across care settings. Emerging technologies and approaches promise to improve risk assessment, but there is also need for large, longitudinal, representative, prospective CHD cohorts with multidimensional data and consensus-driven methodologies to provide insight into time-varying risk. Communication of risk, particularly with patients and their families, poses a separate and equally important challenge, and best practices are reviewed.

Current approach to genetic testing and genetic evaluation referrals for adults with congenital heart disease

Background

Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common congenital anomaly. Up to 33% have an identifiable genetic etiology. Improved medical and surgical management of CHD has translated into longer life expectancy and a rapidly growing population of adults living with CHD. The adult CHD (ACHD) population did not have access during childhood to the genetic technologies available today and therefore have not had a robust genetic evaluation that is currently recommended for infants with CHD. Given this potential benefit; the aims of this study were to determine how ACHD cardiologists offer genetics services to patients and identify the indications that influence decision-making for genetics care.

Methods

We performed a descriptive cross-sectional study of ACHD cardiologists. A study-developed questionnaire was distributed via emailed REDCap link. The recruitment email was sent to 104 potential respondents. The survey was open from 06/2022 to 01/2023.

Results

Thirty-five cardiologists participated in the study (response rate of 34%). Most cardiologists identified as white (77%) and male (66%). Cardiologists were more likely to refer patients to genetics (91%) than to order testing themselves (57%). Of the testing ordered, chromosomal testing (55%) was ordered more than gene sequencing (14%). Most cardiologists would refer a patient with a conotruncal lesion (interrupted aortic arch) over other indications for a genetics evaluation. There were more reported barriers to ordering genetic testing (66%) compared to referring to genetics for a genetics evaluation (23%). Cardiologists were more confident recognizing features suggestive of a genetic syndrome than ordering the correct test (p = 0.001). Regarding associations between clinical factors and current practices, more years in practice trended towards less referrals and testing. Evaluating a greater number of patients (p = 0.11) and greater confidence recognizing syndromic features (p = 0.12) and ordering the correct test (p = 0.09) were all associated with ordering more testing.

Conclusion

Testing for microdeletion syndromes is being offered and completed in the ACHD population, however testing for single-gene disorders associated with CHD is being under-utilized. Developing guidelines for genetic testing in adults with CHD could increase access to genetic services, impact medical management, reduce uncertainty regarding prognosis, and inform recurrence risk estimates.

Clinical Decision Analysis of Genetic Evaluation and Testing in 1013 Intensive Care Unit Infants with Congenital Heart Defects Supports Universal Genetic Testing

Extracardiac anomalies (ECAs) are strong predictors of genetic disorders in infants with congenital heart disease (CHD), but there are no prior studies assessing performance of ECA status as a screen for genetic diagnoses in CHD patients. This retrospective cohort study assessed this in our comprehensive inpatient CHD genetics service focusing on neonates and infants admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The performance and diagnostic utility of using ECA status to screen for genetic disorders was assessed using decision curve analysis, a statistical tool to assess clinical utility, determining the threshold of phenotypic screening by ECA versus a Test-All approach. Over 24% of infants had genetic diagnoses identified (n = 244/1013), and ECA-positive status indicated a 4-fold increased risk of having a genetic disorder. However, ECA status had low-moderate screening performance based on predictive summary index, a compositive measure of positive and negative predictive values. For those with genetic diagnoses, nearly one-third (32%, 78/244) were ECA-negative but had cytogenetic and/or monogenic disorders identified by genetic testing. Thus, if the presence of multiple congenital anomalies is the phenotypic driver to initiate genetic testing, 13.4% (78/580) of infants with isolated CHD with identifiable genetic causes will be missed. Given the prevalence of genetic disorders and limited screening performance of ECA status, this analysis supports genetic testing in all CHD infants in intensive care settings rather than screening based on ECA.

A Pilot Study of Multiplex Ligation-Dependent Probe Amplification Evaluation of Copy Number Variations in Romanian Children with Congenital Heart Defects

Congenital heart defects (CHDs) have had an increasing prevalence over the last decades, being one of the most common congenital defects. Their etiopathogenesis is multifactorial in origin. About 10-15% of all CHD can be attributed to copy number variations (CNVs), a type of submicroscopic structural genetic alterations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the involvement of CNVs in the development of congenital heart defects. We performed a cohort study investigating the presence of CNVs in the 22q11.2 region and GATA4, TBX5, NKX2-5, BMP4, and CRELD1 genes in patients with syndromic and isolated CHDs. A total of 56 patients were included in the study, half of them (28 subjects) being classified as syndromic. The most common heart defect in our study population was ventricular septal defect (VSD) at 39.28%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of CHD-type distribution, demographical, and clinical features, with the exceptions of birth length, weight, and length at the time of blood sampling, that were significantly lower in the syndromic group. Through multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) analysis, we found two heterozygous deletions in the 22q11.2 region, both in patients from the syndromic group. No CNVs involving GATA4, NKX2-5, TBX5, BMP4, and CRELD1 genes were identified in our study. We conclude that the MLPA assay may be used as a first genetic test in patients with syndromic CHD and that the 22q11.2 region may be included in the panels used for screening these patients.

Human Genetics of Congenital Heart Defects

Congenital heart diseases (or congenital heart defects/disorders; CHDs) are structural abnormalities of the heart and/or great vessels that are present at birth. CHDs include an extensive range of defects that may be minor and require no intervention or may be life-limiting and require complex surgery shortly after birth. This chapter reviews the current knowledge on the genetic causes of CHD.

Postnatal genetic testing on cord blood for prenatally identified high-probability cases

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utility of postnatal genetic testing on umbilical cord blood (CB) for prenatally identified high-probability fetuses.

METHOD

CB for genetic testing was offered to individuals who met one of the following criteria: (i) fetal anomaly, (ii) positive non-invasive prenatal screening by cfDNA or biochemical analysis, or (iii) family history. Individuals with diagnostic testing, but not microarray, were also included when recommended by society guidelines. CB was collected at Brigham and Women's and Emerson Hospitals between 2016 and 2021.

RESULTS

448 individuals consented for cord blood testing (370 (82.6%) for fetal anomalies, 51 (11.4%) for high-probability cfDNA, and 27 (6.0%) for family history) and a total of 393 (87.7%) samples were analyzed. Genetic testing yielded a diagnosis in 92 (23.4%) neonates by karyotype (n = 37), chromosomal microarray (CMA) (n = 32), and other molecular analysis (n = 23). Testing averaged 10.3 days (range 1-118 days). 68 (73.9%) diagnoses potentially impacted neonatal management. MCC could not be definitively excluded in only 1.4% (6/418) of samples.

CONCLUSION

Prenatal identification of high-probability fetuses and genetic testing on CB facilitates timely genetic diagnoses and neonatal management. Testing provides reassurance and reduces a postnatal diagnostic odyssey for high-probability neonates.

Evidence-Based Assessment of Congenital Heart Disease Genes to Enable Returning Results in a Genomic Study

BACKGROUND

Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common major congenital anomaly and causes significant morbidity and mortality. Epidemiologic evidence supports a role of genetics in the development of CHD. Genetic diagnoses can inform prognosis and clinical management. However, genetic testing is not standardized among individuals with CHD. We sought to develop a list of validated CHD genes using established methods and to evaluate the process of returning genetic results to research participants in a large genomic study.

METHODS

Two-hundred ninety-five candidate CHD genes were evaluated using a ClinGen framework. Sequence and copy number variants involving genes in the CHD gene list were analyzed in Pediatric Cardiac Genomics Consortium participants. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic results were confirmed on a new sample in a clinical laboratory improvement amendments-certified laboratory and disclosed to eligible participants. Adult probands and parents of probands who received results were asked to complete a post-disclosure survey.

RESULTS

A total of 99 genes had a strong or definitive clinical validity classification. Diagnostic yields for copy number variants and exome sequencing were 1.8% and 3.8%, respectively. Thirty-one probands completed clinical laboratory improvement amendments-confirmation and received results. Participants who completed postdisclosure surveys reported high personal utility and no decision regret after receiving genetic results.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of ClinGen criteria to CHD candidate genes yielded a list that can be used to interpret clinical genetic testing for CHD. Applying this gene list to one of the largest research cohorts of CHD participants provides a lower bound for the yield of genetic testing in CHD.

Copy-number variation in congenital heart disease

Genomic copy-number variants (CNVs) contribute to as many congenital heart disease (CHD) cases (10-15%) as chromosomal aberrations or single-gene mutations and influence clinical outcomes. CNVs in a few genomic hotspots (1q21.1, 2q13, 8p23.1, 11q24, 15q11.2, 16p11.2, and 22q11.2) are recurrently enriched in CHD cohorts and affect dosage-sensitive transcriptional regulators that are required for cardiac development. Reduced penetrance and pleiotropic effects on brain and heart development are common features of these CNVs. Therefore, additional genetic 'hits,' such as a second CNV or gene mutation, are probably required to cause CHD in most cases. Integrative analysis of CNVs, genome sequence, epigenetic alterations, and gene function will be required to delineate the complete genetic landscape of CHD.

Assessing genetic counselors' graduate school education and training in congenital heart defects

Genetic counselors are one of the many providers involved in caring for patients with congenital heart defects (CHDs); however, little is known about the cardiovascular genetics training they receive by their graduate programs. To explore the recalled education experiences regarding CHDs by practicing genetic counselors, we surveyed graduates of programs primarily accredited by the American Council on Genetic Counseling (ACGC) about their graduate training in this area, the depth of CHD-specific education they received, and whether CHDs are a substantial referral indication in their current practice. Genetic counselors were recruited from the National Society of Genetic Counselors and Twitter (n = 112), and participants reflecting multiple specialties and 35 graduate programs completed an online survey which included questions about fieldwork placements and lectures in cardiovascular genetics, exposure to classification schemes regarding cardiac embryology, and education in counseling strategies for CHDs and CHD-related topics during their graduate training. When asked whether CHDs are a substantial referral indication seen in their current practice, 55% (62/112) responded yes. Most participants (79%, 88/112) recalled receiving some education about CHDs, but 91% (80/88) reported receiving little to no education regarding embryologic classification of CHDs and how to apply classification schemes to their counseling. Both participating prenatal and pediatric GCs reported that CHDs can be a common referral indication, yet they reported receiving limited education on teratogens associated with CHDs, family screening recommendations, and recurrence risk counseling for CHDs. Based on participant responses, the majority of respondents reported receiving sufficient education on syndromes with CHDs which can be beneficial in specialties such as pediatrics. This exploratory study provides insight into opportunities to further support genetic counseling educational opportunities for CHDs. These findings suggest genetic counseling graduate programs could consider implementing education on CHD counseling strategies as a standardized component of the curriculum and that practicing genetic counselors could benefit from educational opportunities and resources with updated information on this topic.