Deaf genetic testing and psychological well-being in deaf adults

Clinical evaluation and etiologic diagnosis of hearing loss: A clinical practice resource of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)

Hearing loss is a common and complex condition that can occur at any age, can be inherited or acquired, and is associated with a remarkably wide array of etiologies. The diverse causes of hearing loss, combined with the highly variable and often overlapping presentations of different forms of hearing loss, challenge the ability of traditional clinical evaluations to arrive at an etiologic diagnosis for many deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. However, identifying the etiology of hearing loss may affect clinical management, improve prognostic accuracy, and refine genetic counseling and assessment of the likelihood of recurrence for relatives of deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. Linguistic and cultural identities associated with being deaf or hard-of-hearing can complicate access to and the effectiveness of clinical care. These concerns can be minimized when genetic and other health care services are provided in a linguistically and culturally sensitive manner. This clinical practice resource offers information about the frequency, causes, and presentations of hearing loss and suggests approaches to the clinical and genetic evaluation of deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals aimed at identifying an etiologic diagnosis and providing informative and effective patient education and genetic counseling.

Personal utility of genomic sequencing for infants with congenital deafness

Decisions about genetic testing have traditionally been based on clinical utility and cost, but personal utility is increasingly recognized when assessing the value of testing. Whole exome sequencing (WES) was offered to a population cohort of 106 infants diagnosed with congenital hearing loss. Parents could choose to receive results relating to hearing loss only or also learn additional information about childhood-onset conditions (medically nonactionable and/or actionable). This study aimed to quantify the personal utility of WES for parents after a diagnosis of hearing loss in their child. Parents completed surveys pretest (63/106), after hearing loss results (52/106) and after receiving additional information (47/72). Open-ended responses from all three surveys (N = 67) were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Answers to questions regarding the value of sequencing to parents were analyzed and collated. Parents placed high value on diagnostic WES for hearing loss but had different perspectives on the personal utility of additional information. Diagnostic results provided certainty while the choice to learn additional information about childhood-onset disorders was associated with empowerment. WES also represented an opportunity to promote their child's best interests. Results provide insights into the utility of WES for the indication of congenital deafness and for genomic newborn screening broadly.

Exome Sequencing for Isolated Congenital Hearing Loss: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To assess the relative cost-effectiveness of exome sequencing for isolated congenital deafness compared with standard care.

STUDY DESIGN

Incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses were undertaken from the perspective of the Australian healthcare system using an 18-year time horizon.

METHODS

A decision tree was used to model the costs and outcomes associated with exome sequencing and standard care for infants presenting with isolated congenital deafness.

RESULTS

Exome sequencing resulted in an incremental cost of AU$1,000 per child and an additional 30 diagnoses per 100 children tested. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was AU$3,333 per additional diagnosis. The mean societal willingness to pay for exome sequencing was estimated at AU$4,600 per child tested relative to standard care, resulting in a positive net benefit of AU$3,600. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the cost-effectiveness of exome sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of exome sequencing in congenital hearing loss, through increased diagnostic rate and consequent improved process of care by reducing or ceasing diagnostic investigation or facilitating targeted further investigation. We recommend equitable funding for exome sequencing in infants presenting with isolated congenital hearing loss.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A. Laryngoscope, 131:E2371-E2377, 2021.

Genetic testing for congenital non-syndromic sensorineural hearing loss

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 60% of congenital pediatric hearing loss is of genetic etiology. To evaluate non-syndromic sensorineural hearing loss (NSSNHL), guidelines emphasize the use of comprehensive genetic testing (CGT) with next generation sequencing (NGS), yet these tests have limited accessibility, and potential CGT results may not be well understood. Thus, our objective was to analyze genetic testing practices and results for pediatric patients with NSSNHL.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of pediatric patients (<18 years) diagnosed with NSSNHL from 2014 to 2017 at a tertiary pediatric hospital. Demographics, clinical data, CGT results, genetic testing practices and referral patterns were recorded and descriptively analyzed. Logistic regression models identified patient characteristics associated with pathogenic variants (PV) and variants of unknown significance (VOUS).

RESULTS

430 patients with congenital NSSNHL were included in the study. Genetic testing was ordered for 28% (n = 122) and resulted for 16% (n = 68). Most of the ordered tests (89%, n = 109) were the CGT panel. A majority (62%, n = 97) of the time in which genetic testing was not ordered, a referral for genetics consultation was placed. Amongst those with CGT results, a definitive genetic etiology was identified in 25% (n = 13), with less than half due to variants of GJB2/6. At least one PV was identified for 33% (n = 18), while at least one VOUS for 93% (n = 51). There were no significant differences in PV presence or number of VOUS across any characteristic except race. When compared to Caucasians, African Americans had significantly higher rates of VOUS with a rate ratio and 95% CI of 1.61 [1.11-2.34], p = 0.01, and Asians trended towards higher rates (1.96 [0.95-4.05], p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

CGT is of high utility in the identification of relevant genetic variants and definitive genetic etiologies for pediatric patients with NSSNHL. Though guidelines recommend the early use of CGT, there are many barriers to appropriate testing and counseling, leading to low rates of CGT use at this single institution.

Prevalence of anxiety disorders and symptoms in people with hearing impairment: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Anxiety disorders are common. Prevalence is likely to be raised in people with hearing impairment, who experience higher rates of associated risk factors. We conducted, to our knowledge, the first systematic review of the prevalence and correlates of anxiety in people with hearing impairment.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and references of included studies, using predetermined criteria to retrieve original research reporting prevalence of anxiety disorders or symptoms in adult, hearing impaired populations. We assessed risk of bias using the adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

We included 25 studies evaluating 17,135 people with hearing impairment. Community studies of higher quality reported a lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorder of 11.1% (one study) and point prevalences of 15.4-31.3% for clinically significant anxiety symptoms (five studies) in people who predominantly had acquired hearing impairment. Anxiety prevalence was higher in hearing impaired people in 8/10 studies with a comparator non-hearing impaired group. Anxiety symptoms decreased after surgical intervention for hearing in all studies investigating this. Correlates consistently associated with anxiety were tinnitus and hearing impairment severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of anxiety is higher among people with hearing impairment than the general population; our findings indicate that this excess morbidity may be related to the hearing impairment itself, as it was associated with the severity of impairment, and reduced after surgical treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the potential impact of hearing on mental health, and that where hearing ability can be improved, this may reduce anxiety.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018088463.

Psychological impact of a genetic diagnosis on hearing impairment-An exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

Genetic testing for hereditary hearing impairment has become more routinely available as a diagnostic tool in the outpatient clinic. However, little is known about the psychological impact of a genetic diagnosis. To evaluate this impact, an exploratory study was conducted.

DESIGN

Prospectively, 48 individuals who underwent genetic testing for hereditary hearing impairment were included in this study. Study participants were asked to fill out the following questionnaires: Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, Impact of Event Scale, Self-Efficacy 24, Illness Cognition Questionnaire and the Inventory for Social Reliance. Questionnaires were filled out on three occasions: before genetic testing, directly after counselling on either positive or negative test results, and six weeks thereafter.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the group that received a genetic diagnosis for their hearing impairment and the group that did not.

CONCLUSION

This study did not demonstrate differences between receiving a genetic diagnosis or not; however, special attention to psychological well-being should be offered to hearing-impaired patients who seek a genetic diagnosis for their hearing impairment. Additionally, the psychological impact of sensorineural hearing impairment might be greater than the impact of a genetic diagnosis itself. Based on the current exploratory study, there are no psychological reasons in favour of or against genetic testing for hereditary hearing impairment.

Features of autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing impairment: a review to serve as a reference

OBJECTIVE

Non-syndromic sensorineural hearing impairment is inherited in an autosomal recessive fashion in 75-85% of cases. To date, 61 genes with this type of inheritance have been identified as related to hearing impairment, and the genetic heterogeneity is accompanied by a large variety of clinical characteristics. Adequate counselling on a patient's hearing prognosis and rehabilitation is part of the diagnosis on the genetic cause of hearing impairment and, in addition, is important for the psychological well-being of the patient.

TYPE OF REVIEW

Traditional literature review.

DATA SOURCE

All articles describing clinical characteristics of the audiovestibular phenotypes of identified genes and related loci have been reviewed.

CONCLUSION

This review aims to serve as a summary and a reference for counselling purposes when a causative gene has been identified in a patient with a non-syndromic autosomal recessively inherited sensorineural hearing impairment.

Impact of genetic counseling and Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 testing on deaf identity and comprehension of genetic test results in a sample of deaf adults: a prospective, longitudinal study

Using a prospective, longitudinal study design, this paper addresses the impact of genetic counseling and testing for deafness on deaf adults and the Deaf community. This study specifically evaluated the effect of genetic counseling and Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic test results on participants' deaf identity and understanding of their genetic test results. Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic testing was offered to participants in the context of linguistically and culturally appropriate genetic counseling. Questionnaire data collected from 209 deaf adults at four time points (baseline, immediately following pre-test genetic counseling, 1-month following genetic test result disclosure, and 6-months after result disclosure) were analyzed. Four deaf identity orientations (hearing, marginal, immersion, bicultural) were evaluated using subscales of the Deaf Identity Development Scale-Revised. We found evidence that participants understood their specific genetic test results following genetic counseling, but found no evidence of change in deaf identity based on genetic counseling or their genetic test results. This study demonstrated that culturally and linguistically appropriate genetic counseling can improve deaf clients' understanding of genetic test results, and the formation of deaf identity was not directly related to genetic counseling or Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic test results.

American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guideline for the clinical evaluation and etiologic diagnosis of hearing loss

Hearing loss is a common and complex condition that can occur at any age, can be inherited or acquired, and is associated with a remarkably wide array of etiologies. The diverse causes of hearing loss, combined with the highly variable and often overlapping presentations of different forms of hearing loss, challenge the ability of traditional clinical evaluations to arrive at an etiologic diagnosis for many deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. However, identifying the etiology of a hearing loss may affect clinical management, improve prognostic accuracy, and refine genetic counseling and assessment of the likelihood of recurrence for relatives of deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. Linguistic and cultural identities associated with being deaf or hard of hearing can complicate access to and the effectiveness of clinical care. These concerns can be minimized when genetic and other health-care services are provided in a linguistically and culturally sensitive manner. This guideline offers information about the frequency, causes, and presentations of hearing loss and suggests approaches to the clinical evaluation of deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals aimed at identifying an etiologic diagnosis and providing informative and effective patient education and genetic counseling.

Using a social marketing framework to evaluate recruitment of a prospective study of genetic counseling and testing for the deaf community

BACKGROUND

Recruiting deaf and hard-of-hearing participants, particularly sign language-users, for genetics health service research is challenging due to communication barriers, mistrust toward genetics, and researchers' unfamiliarity with deaf people. Feelings of social exclusion and lack of social cohesion between researchers and the Deaf community are factors to consider. Social marketing is effective for recruiting hard-to-reach populations because it fosters social inclusion and cohesion by focusing on the targeted audience's needs. For the deaf population this includes recognizing their cultural and linguistic diversity, their geography, and their systems for information exchange. Here we use concepts and language from social marketing to evaluate our effectiveness to engage a U.S. deaf population in a prospective, longitudinal genetic counseling and testing study.

METHODS

The study design was interpreted in terms of a social marketing mix of Product, Price, Place, and Promotion. Price addressed linguistic diversity by including a variety of communication technologies and certified interpreters to facilitate communication; Place addressed geography by including community-based participation locations; Promotion addressed information exchange by using multiple recruitment strategies. Regression analyses examined the study design's effectiveness in recruiting a culturally and linguistically diverse sample.

RESULTS

271 individuals were enrolled, with 66.1% American Sign Language (ASL)-users, 19.9% ASL + English-users, 12.6% English-users. Language was significantly associated with communication technology, participation location, and recruitment. Videophone and interpreters were more likely to be used for communication between ASL-users and researchers while voice telephone and no interpreters were preferred by English-users (Price). ASL-users were more likely to participate in community-based locations while English-users preferred medically-based locations (Place). English-users were more likely to be recruited through mass media (Promotion) while ASL-users were more likely to be recruited through community events and to respond to messaging that emphasized inclusion of a Deaf perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

This study design effectively engaged the deaf population, particularly sign language-users. Results suggest that the deaf population's cultural and linguistic diversity, geography, and forms of information exchange must be taken into account in study designs for successful recruitment. A social marketing approach that incorporates critical social determinants of health provides a novel and important framework for genetics health service research targeting specific, and hard-to-reach, underserved groups.