Inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research and health services: Genomix workshop report

The social value of genomic sequencing for disadvantaged families facing rare disease

This study explores parental expectations and value-making processes in respect to pediatric clinical genomic sequencing for socially disadvantaged families. Drawing on interviews and ethnographic observations with parents of children with undiagnosed physical and/or intellectual differences seeking to find whether these differences have a genetic etiology, we explore expectations and parental assessments of the value of genomic sequencing within the context of an ongoing research study. We demonstrate how the value of sequencing to parents goes well beyond finding diagnostic results or receiving prescriptive guidance as to the best care and treatment of their child; instead, value is co-created by parents, clinicians, and genetic counsellors throughout the enrollment and return of results process. Parents in our study found that clinicians and genetic counsellors repeatedly reenforce that parents need to lower their expectations and be prepared to wait for genetic science to provide more definitive answers. At the same time, parents experience that clinical teams validate parents for having made a good choice in their undertaking of genomic sequencing and, no matter the result, that they are not to blame for their child's symptoms. The experience of many parents (although not all) is that genomic science reduces or removes their sense of guilt for their child's condition, providing a platform that affirms them as "good parents." Moreover, rather than being voiceless and isolated, socially disadvantaged parents who enter into diagnostic sequencing find themselves in a familial-biosocial framework wherein they are co-partners in a socially and biologically authoritative vision of the future.

Testing a deliberative democracy method with citizens of African ancestry to weigh pros and cons of targeted screening for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

Background

Democratic deliberation (DD), a strategy to foster co-learning among researchers and communities, could be applied to gain informed public input on health policies relating to genomic translation.

Purpose

We evaluated the quality of DD for gaining informed community perspectives regarding targeting communities of African Ancestry (AAn) for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) screening in Georgia.

Methods

We audiotaped a 2.5 day conference conducted via zoom in March 2021 to examine indicators of deliberation quality based on three principles: (1) inclusivity (diverse viewpoints based on participants' demographics, cancer history, and civic engagement), (2) consideration of factual information (balanced and unbiased expert testimonies, participant perceived helpfulness), and (3) deliberation (speaking opportunities, adoption of a societal perspective on the issue, reasoned justification of ideas, and participant satisfaction).

Results

We recruited 24 participants who reflected the diversity of views and life experiences of citizens of AAn living in Georgia. The expert testimony development process we undertook for creating balanced factual information was endorsed by experts' feedback. Deliberation process evaluation showed that while participation varied (average number of statements = 24, range: 3-62), all participants contributed. Participants were able to apply expert information and take a societal perspective to deliberate on the pros and cons of targeting individuals of AAn for HBOC screening in Georgia.

Conclusions

The rigorous process of public engagement using deliberative democracy approach can successfully engage a citizenry with diverse and well-informed views, do so in a relatively short time frame and yield perspectives based on high quality discussion.

Effects of family history of alcohol problems on alcohol consumption: Stronger for medically underserved men

Family history (FH), informed by genetics and family environment, can be used by practitioners for risk prediction. This study compares the associations of FH with alcohol outcomes for medically underserved (MUS) men and women with the associations for non-underserved individuals to assess the utility of FH as a screening tool for this high-priority group. Data were from 29,993 adult lifetime drinkers in the Wave 1 (2001-2002) and Wave 2 (2004-2005) National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. All variables except FH were measured at Wave 2. Dependent variables were 12-month alcohol consumption and alcohol use disorder (AUD). FH scores (FH-SCORE) measured the proportion of first- and second-degree biological relatives with alcohol problems. MUS status was defined by household income at or below 100% of the federal poverty line and participants reporting no usual source of health care. Multivariate linear and logistic regression models tested main and interaction effects. Models showed a significant interaction of FH-SCORE with MUS status (p < .01), with a stronger effect of FH on alcohol consumption for the MUS group. This moderating effect was weaker for women than for men (FH-SCORE x MUS x Sex three-way interaction: p < .01). AUD models showed a significant positive association with FH-SCORE (p < .001) but no association with MUS status and no significant interaction effects. In this sample of lifetime drinkers, FH was associated with higher alcohol consumption, especially for MUS men. These results encourage additional validation of FH scores to prioritize MUS adults at high risk for alcohol problems to receive preventive interventions.

Literacy-adapted, electronic family history assessment for genetics referral in primary care: patient user insights from qualitative interviews

BACKGROUND

Risk assessment for hereditary cancer syndromes is recommended in primary care, but family history is rarely collected in enough detail to facilitate risk assessment and referral - a roadblock that disproportionately impacts individuals with healthcare access barriers. We sought to qualitatively assess a literacy-adapted, electronic patient-facing family history tool developed for use in diverse, underserved patient populations recruited in the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) Study.

METHODS

Interview participants were recruited from a subpopulation of CHARM participants who experienced barriers to tool use in terms of spending a longer time to complete the tool, having incomplete attempts, and/or providing inaccurate family history in comparison to a genetic counselor-collected standard. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants about barriers and facilitators to tool use and overall tool acceptability; interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. Transcripts were coded based on a codebook developed using inductive techniques, and coded excerpts were reviewed to identify overarching themes related to barriers and facilitators to family history self-assessment and acceptability of the study tool.

RESULTS

Interviewees endorsed the tool as easy to navigate and understand. However, they described barriers related to family history information, literacy and language, and certain tool functions. Participants offered concrete, easy-to-implement solutions to each barrier. Despite experience barriers to use of the tool, most participants indicated that electronic family history self-assessment was acceptable or preferable in comparison to clinician-collected family history.

CONCLUSIONS

Even for participants who experienced barriers to tool use, family history self-assessment was considered an acceptable alternative to clinician-collected family history. Barriers experienced could be overcome with minor adaptations to the current family history tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is a sub-study of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) trial, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03426878. Registered 8 February 2018.

American Cancer Society's report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States, 2021

In this report, the authors provide comprehensive and up-to-date US data on disparities in cancer occurrence, major risk factors, and access to and utilization of preventive measures and screening by sociodemographic characteristics. They also review programs and resources that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. The overall cancer death rate is 19% higher among Black males than among White males. Black females also have a 12% higher overall cancer death rate than their White counterparts despite having an 8% lower incidence rate. There are also substantial variations in death rates for specific cancer types and in stage at diagnosis, survival, exposure to risk factors, and receipt of preventive measures and screening by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. For example, kidney cancer death rates by sex among American Indian/Alaska Native people are ≥64% higher than the corresponding rates in each of the other racial/ethnic groups, and the 5-year relative survival for all cancers combined is 14% lower among residents of poorer counties than among residents of more affluent counties. Broad and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage through Medicaid expansion or other initiatives, could substantially reduce cancer disparities. However, progress will require not only equitable local, state, and federal policies but also broad interdisciplinary engagement to elevate and address fundamental social inequities and longstanding systemic racism.

Making community voices heard in a research-health service alliance, the evolving role of the Community Advisory Group: a case study from the members' perspective

BACKGROUND

The Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance (the Alliance) is a collaboration of leading hospitals, research and academic organisations, supported by its member organisations and the Victorian Government. The Alliance was set up by its members in 2013 to steer the translation of genomics, making it an integral part of health care in Victoria, Australia. The Community Advisory Group (CAG) was formed soon after, to give input and advice across the program. This was to ensure consideration of community values, perspectives and priorities, and knowledge translation for patient care. The CAG was charged with providing a strong community voice for the duration of the program. Appointed members were experienced consumer advocates with developed connections to the community.

MAIN BODY

The Alliance progressed from an initial Demonstration Project (2013-2015) to a multifaceted program (2016-2020). The CAG worked strategically to help address complex issues, for example, communication, privacy, informed consent, ethics, patient experience, measurement and evaluation standards and policies, data storage and re-use of genomic data. Many aspects of translating genomics into routine care have been tackled, such as communicating with patients invited to have genomic testing, or their caregivers, and obtaining informed consent, clinical questions across 16 areas of health care, training and education of health and laboratory professionals, genomic data management and data-sharing. Evidence generated around clinical utility and cost-effectiveness led to government funding of testing for complex genetic conditions in children.

CONCLUSION

The CAG activities, recorded in a CAG-inspired Activity register, span the full spectrum of information sharing and consultation to co-design and partnership. The CAG were involved at multiple levels of participation and in all tiers of activity including governance, development of policies and procedures, program planning and evaluation. Working relationships were built up and a level of trust instilled to advance the Alliance work program in ensuring an effective patient-care model of delivery of genomics. CAG input into project deliverables has been tangible. Less tangible contributions included presentations at external meetings and conferences, direct interactions at meetings with Alliance members, interactions with visitors and external experts, taking part in consultations with experts, state and federal government.

Creating accessible Spanish language materials for Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium genomic projects: challenges and lessons learned

Aim: To increase Spanish speakers' representation in genomics research, accessible study materials on genetic topics must be made available in Spanish. Materials & methods: The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium is evaluating genome sequencing for underserved populations. All sites needed Spanish translation of recruitment materials, surveys and return of results. Results: We describe our process for translating site-specific materials, as well as shared measures across sites, to inform future efforts to engage Spanish speakers in research. Conclusion: In translating and adapting study materials for roughly 1000 Spanish speakers across the USA, and harmonizing translated measures across diverse sites, we overcame numerous challenges. Translation should be performed by professionals. Studies must allocate sufficient time, effort and budget to translate and adapt participant materials.

Practices and Attitudes toward Returning Genomic Research Results to Low-Resource Research Participants

INTRODUCTION

Many research programs are challenged to accommodate low-resource research participants' (LRRP) ancillary care needs when returning genomic research results. We define LRRP as those who are low income, uninsured, underinsured, or facing barriers to act upon the results returned. This study evaluates current policies and practices surrounding return of results (RoR) to LRRP, as well as the attitudes of investigators toward providing ancillary care to LRRP.

METHODS

A semi-structured interview study was conducted with representatives of 35 genomic research programs nationwide. Eligible programs were returning, or planning to return, medically actionable genomic results to participants.

RESULTS

Three content categories emerged from this study, including: (1) RoR structures, (2) barriers to RoR to LRRP, and (3) solutions to meet community and LRRP needs. Three major structures of RoR emerged: (1) RoR Embedded in Clinical Care, (2) RoR Independent of Clinical Care, and (3) Reliance on Clinical Partnerships to Facilitate RoR. Inadequacy of program resources to address the needs of LRRP was commonly considered a significant obstacle. The attitudes and views of informants regarding responsibility to provide ancillary care for LRRP receiving genomic results were highly varied. Some informants believed that genomic sequencing and testing was not a priority for LRRP because of other pressing issues in their lives, such as housing and food insecurity. Research programs differ regarding whether clinical and social support for LRRP is considered within the purview of the research team. Some programs instituted accommodations for LRRP, including social work referral and insurance enrollment assistance.

CONCLUSION

Support to access downstream treatment is not readily available for LRRP in many genomic research programs. Development of best practices and policies for managing RoR to LRRP is needed.

Ethics and equity in rare disease research and healthcare

Rapid advances in next-generation sequencing technology, particularly whole exome sequencing and whole genome sequencing, have greatly affected our understanding of genetic variation underlying rare genetic diseases. Herein, we describe ethical principles of guiding consent and sharing of genomics research data. We also discuss ethical dilemmas in rare diseases research and patient recruitment policies and address bioethical and societal aspects influencing the ethical framework for genetic testing. Moreover, we focus on addressing ethical issues surrounding research in low- and middle-income countries. Overall, this perspective aims to address key aspects and issues for building proper ethical frameworks, when conducting research involving genomics data with a particular emphasis on rare diseases and genetics testing.

Adaptation and early implementation of the PREdiction model for gene mutations (PREMM5™) for lynch syndrome risk assessment in a diverse population

Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common inherited cause of colorectal and endometrial cancers. Identifying individuals at risk for LS without personal cancer history requires detailed collection and assessment of family health history. However, barriers exist to family health history collection, especially in historically underserved populations. To improve LS risk assessment in historically underserved populations, we adapted the provider-facing PREdiction Model for gene Mutations (PREMM₅™ model), a validated LS risk assessment model, into a patient-facing electronic application through an iterative development process involving expert and patient stakeholders. We report on preliminary findings based on the first 500 individuals exposed to the adapted application in a primary care population enriched for low-literacy and low-resource patients. Major adaptations to the PREMM₅™ provider module included reduction in reading level, addition of interactive literacy aids, incorporation of family history assessment for both maternal and paternal sides of the family, and inclusion of questions about individual relatives or small groups of relatives to reduce cognitive burden. In the first 500 individuals, 90% completed the PREMM₅™ independently; of those, 94% did so in 5 min or less (ranged from 0.2 to 48.8 min). The patient-facing application was able to accurately classify 84% of patients as having clinically significant or not clinically significant LS risk. Our preliminary results suggest that in this diverse study population, most participants were able to rapidly, accurately, and independently complete an interactive application collecting family health history assessment that accurately assessed for Lynch syndrome risk.

Enhancing inclusion of diverse populations in genomics: A competence framework

Genomic knowledge and technology have developed rapidly over the last decade and increased our capabilities to diagnose and manage rare diseases. However, current genomic datasets lack ethnic diversity as many genomic studies have focused on participants of white European ancestry. Studies, such as the Deciphering Developmental Disorders study, have been available to participants of any ancestry but have been unsuccessful in recruiting diverse populations. The inclusion of diverse populations in exome and genome sequencing is important to ensure that clinical benefits of genomics advances are equally shared among all populations and to advance scientific knowledge. Our clinical and research experience with the British Pakistani population (the largest ethnic minority in Yorkshire and Humber, accounting for 4.3% of the population) has fostered the development of an innovative cultural competence framework to enhance the inclusion of diverse populations in clinical genomic research and service provision. The application of this framework has the potential to guide healthcare professionals to develop a wide range of competences, so they are ready to embrace genomic advances in order to improve health outcomes for all patients. This practice model will inform precision medicine and improve access of diverse populations to genomic studies. Although based upon work with the Pakistani population in the UK, it is anticipated that the model would be broadly applicable to all underrepresented populations across the world.

Creating Affirmative and Inclusive Practices When Providing Genetic and Genomic Diagnostic and Research Services to Gender-Expansive and Transgender Patients

BACKGROUND

Gender expansive and transgender (GET) healthcare extends beyond gender-affirming therapies, reaching every medical specialty and subspecialty. As the number of GET patients seeking health services has increased, so has the need for standards of care regarding GET-affirmative practices throughout the healthcare system. As such, the number of publications surrounding GET-affirmative practices has steadily risen. However, even as such research has gained ground in other areas, one realm in which there has been a relative lag is genetics and genomics (GG).

CONTENT

In this article, we track the GET patient and their laboratory sample from the clinic to the GG laboratory and back. Throughout the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical phases, we identify publications, recommendations, and guidelines relevant to the care of the GET community. We also identity knowledge gaps in each area and provide recommendations for affirmative and inclusive processes for addressing those gaps.

SUMMARY

We have identified the practices involved in GG services that would benefit from GET-affirmative process improvement, reviewing relevant affirmative guidelines. Where guidelines could not be found, we identified those knowledge gaps and suggested potential solutions and future directions for implementing GET-affirmative practices.

Sharing genomic data from clinical testing with researchers: public survey of expectations of clinical genomic data management in Queensland, Australia

Background

There has been considerable investment and strategic planning to introduce genomic testing into Australia’s public health system. As more patients’ genomic data is being held by the public health system, there will be increased requests from researchers to access this data. It is important that public policy reflects public expectations for how genomic data that is generated from clinical tests is used. To inform public policy and discussions around genomic data sharing, we sought public opinions on using genomic data contained in medical records for research purposes in the Australian state of Queensland.

Methods

A total of 1494 participants completed an online questionnaire between February and May 2019. Participants were adults living in Australia. The questionnaire explored participant preferences for sharing genomic data or biological samples with researchers, and concerns about genomic data sharing.

Results

Most participants wanted to be given the choice to have their genomic data from medical records used in research. Their expectations on whether and how often they needed to be approached for permission on using their genomic data, depended on whether the data was identifiable or anonymous. Their willingness to sharing data for research purposes depended on the type of information being shared, what type of research would be undertaken and who would be doing the research. Participants were most concerned with genomics data sharing that could lead to discrimination (insurance and employment), data being used for marketing, data security, or commercial use.

Conclusions

Most participants were willing to share their genomic data from medical records with researchers, as long as permission for use was sought. However, the existing policies related to this process in Queensland do not reflect participant expectations for how this is achieved, particularly with anonymous genomics data. This inconsistency may be addressed by process changes, such as inclusion of research in addition to clinical consent or general research data consent programs.

Funding of Hispanic/Latino Health-Related Research by the National Institutes of Health: An Analysis of the Portfolio of Research Program Grants on Six Health Topic Areas

Hispanics/Latinos are expected to constitute 25% of the U.S. population by 2060. Differences in the prevalence of health risk factors, chronic diseases, and access to and utilization of health-care services between Hispanics/Latinos and other populations in the U.S. have been documented. This study aimed to describe and analyze the landscape of Research Program Grants (RPGs) funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) between 2008 and 2015 involving Hispanic/Latino health research in six health condition areas-asthma, cancer, dementia, diabetes, liver/gallbladder disease, and obesity-and to identify opportunities for continued research in these areas. Using an NIH internal search engine, we identified new and renewal Hispanic/Latino health RPGs searching for specific Hispanic/Latino identifiers in the Title, Abstract, and Specific Aims. We used descriptive statistics to examine the distribution of funded RPGs by NIH disease-based classification codes for the six health condition areas of interest, and other selected characteristics. The most prominent clusters of research subtopics were identified within each health condition area, and performance sites were mapped at the city level. Within the selected time frame, 3,221 Hispanic/Latino health-related unique RPGs were funded (constituting 4.4% of all funded RPGs), and of those 625 RPGs were eligible for review and coding in the present study. Cancer and obesity were the most commonly studied health condition areas (72%), while studies on mechanisms of disease-biological and non-biological-(72.6%), behavioral research (42.1%) and epidemiological studies (38.1%) were the most common types of research. Most of the primary performance sites were in California, Texas, the northeastern U.S., and Illinois. The predominance of mechanistic, behavioral, and epidemiological studies in our analysis poses opportunities to evaluate knowledge gained and their clinical application, explore new research questions, or to update some methods or instruments. The findings of the present study suggest opportunities to expand research in understudied mechanisms of disease that could explain differences in prevalence of conditions like diabetes and cancer among different heritage groups. In addition, our findings suggest that the impact of interventions or policies designed to reduce health disparities, innovative multi-level interventions, implementation and dissemination studies, the role of health information technology on health outcomes, and the intersectionality of individual, sociocultural, geographic, and other factors on health outcomes, among others, are understudied approaches, which could potentially advance research in Hispanic/Latino health and contribute to the achievement of better health outcomes in this diverse population.

Return of Research-Related Genetic Test Results and Genetic Discrimination Concerns: Facilitators and Barriers of Genetic Research Participation in Diverse Groups

BACKGROUND

Most genetics studies lack the diversity necessary to ensure that all groups benefit from genetic research.

OBJECTIVES

To explore facilitators and barriers to genetic research participation.

METHODS

We conducted a survey on genetics in research and healthcare from November 15, 2017 to February 28, 2018 among adult Kaiser Permanente (KP) members who had been invited to participate in the KP biobank (KP Research Bank). We used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the willingness to participate in genetic research under different return of results scenarios and genetic discrimination concerns between groups, according to their demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 57,331 KP members were invited to participate, and 10,369 completed the survey (18% response rate). Respondents were 65% female, 44% non-Hispanic White (NH White), 22% Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (Asian/PI), 19% non-Hispanic Black (NH Black), and 16% Hispanic. Respondents willing to participate in genetic research ranged from 22% with no results returned to 87% if health-related genetic results were returned. We also found variation by race/ethnicity; when no results were to be returned, Asian/PIs, Hispanics, and NH Blacks were less likely to want to participate than NH Whites (p < 0.05). However, when results were returned, disparities in the willingness to participate disappeared for NH Blacks and Hispanics. Genetic discrimination concerns were more prevalent in Asian/PIs, Hispanics, and NH Blacks than in NH Whites (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Policies that prohibit the return of results and do not address genetic discrimination concerns may contribute to a greater underrepresentation of diverse groups in genetic research.

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Comprehension of Biospecimen Collection: a Nationwide University of Rochester Cancer Center NCI Community Oncology Research Program Study

To examine whether (a) non-minority participants differed from racial minority participants in the understanding of biospecimens collected for research purposes, (b) patients differed from comparison group in their understanding of the ways their biospecimens could be used by researchers, and (c) participants received adequate information before consenting to donate blood for research studies. We analyzed cross-sectional data from female breast cancer patients scheduled to receive chemotherapy at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) clinical sites and a healthy comparison group. After reading a consent form related to biospecimens and consenting to participate in a clinical trial, participants' understanding of biospecimen collection was evaluated. Linear models were used to compare scores between non-minority and racial minority participants as well as cancer and non-cancer comparisons adjusting for possible confounding factors. A total of 650 participants provided evaluable data; 592 were non-minority (Caucasian) and 58 participants were a racial minority (71% Black and 29% other). There were 427 cancer patients and 223 comparisons. Non-minority participants scored higher than racial minorities on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.48, CI 0.13-0.80, p = 0.001). Comparison group scored higher than cancer patients on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.58, CI 0.37-0.78). A moderate number of the participants exhibited a poor understanding of biospecimen collection across all racial/ethnic backgrounds, but racial minority participants' scores remained lower in the relevance-to-care subscale even after adjusting for education and reading level. Differences were also noted among the patients and comparison group. Researchers should facilitate comprehension of biospecimen collection for all study participants, especially racial minority participants.

Rethinking the ethical principles of genomic medicine services

Clinical genome and exome sequencing is currently used in only a small fraction of patients, yet large scale genomic initiatives are becoming more embedded in clinical services. This paper examines the ethical principles that should guide regulatory processes regarding consent and data sharing in this context. We argue that a genomic dataset administered by the health system carries substantial societal benefits, and that the collective nature of this initiative means that at least those patients who benefit from genome sequencing have an ethical obligation to share their health information. This obligation is grounded in considerations of fairness. Furthermore, we argue that the use of genomic data for the advancement of medical knowledge should be permitted without explicit consent and that international and other bodies should be granted access to these data, provided certain conditions are satisfied.

PopCluster: an algorithm to identify genetic variants with ethnicity-dependent effects

MOTIVATION

Over the last decade, more diverse populations have been included in genome-wide association studies. If a genetic variant has a varying effect on a phenotype in different populations, genome-wide association studies applied to a dataset as a whole may not pinpoint such differences. It is especially important to be able to identify population-specific effects of genetic variants in studies that would eventually lead to development of diagnostic tests or drug discovery.

RESULTS

In this paper, we propose PopCluster: an algorithm to automatically discover subsets of individuals in which the genetic effects of a variant are statistically different. PopCluster provides a simple framework to directly analyze genotype data without prior knowledge of subjects' ethnicities. PopCluster combines logistic regression modeling, principal component analysis, hierarchical clustering and a recursive bottom-up tree parsing procedure. The evaluation of PopCluster suggests that the algorithm has a stable low false positive rate (∼4%) and high true positive rate (>80%) in simulations with large differences in allele frequencies between cases and controls. Application of PopCluster to data from genetic studies of longevity discovers ethnicity-dependent heterogeneity in the association of rs3764814 (USP42) with the phenotype.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

PopCluster was implemented using the R programming language, PLINK and Eigensoft software, and can be found at the following GitHub repository: https://github.com/gurinovich/PopCluster with instructions on its installation and usage.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Advocacy and actions to address disparities in access to genomic health care: A report on a National Academies workshop

BACKGROUND

In the United States, access to genomic risk assessment, testing, and follow up care is most easily obtained by those who have sufficient financial, educational, and social resources. Multiple barriers limit the ability of populations without those resources to benefit from health care that integrates genomics in assessment of disease risk, diagnosis, and targeted treatment.

PURPOSE

To summarize barriers and potential actions to reduce genomic health care disparities.

METHOD

Summarize authors' views on discussions at a workshop hosted by the National Academy of Medicine.

DISCUSSION

Barriers include access to health care providers that utilize genomics, genetic literacy of providers and patients, and absence of evidence of gene variants importance in ancestrally diverse underserved populations.

CONCLUSION

Engagement between underserved communities, health care providers, and policy makers is an essential component to raise awareness and seek solutions to barriers in access to genomic health care for all populations.

Attitudes of publics who are unwilling to donate DNA data for research

With the use of genetic technology, researchers have the potential to inform medical diagnoses and treatment in actionable ways. Accurate variant interpretation is a necessary condition for the utility of genetic technology to unfold. This relies on the ability to access large genomic datasets so that comparisons can be made between variants of interest. This can only be successful if DNA and medical data are donated by large numbers of people to 'research', including clinical, non-profit and for-profit research initiatives, in order to be accessed by scientists and clinicians worldwide. The objective of the 'Your DNA, Your Say' global survey is to explore public attitudes, values and opinions towards willingness to donate and concerns regarding the donation of one's personal data for use by others. Using a representative sample of 8967 English-speaking publics from the UK, the USA, Canada and Australia, we explore the characteristics of people who are unwilling (n = 1426) to donate their DNA and medical information, together with an exploration of their reasons. Understanding this perspective is important for making sense of the interaction between science and society. It also helps to focus engagement initiatives on the issues of concern to some publics.

Genomics for All: International Open Science Genomics Projects and Capacity Building in the Developing World

Genomic medicine applications have the potential to considerably improve health care in developing countries in the coming years. However, if developing countries do not improve their capacity for research and development (R&D) in the field, they might be left out of the genomics revolution. Large-scale and widely accessible databases for storing and analyzing genomic data are crucial tools for the advancement of genomic medicine. Building developing countries' capacity in genomics is accordingly closely linked to their involvement in international human genomics research initiatives. The purpose of this paper is to conduct a pilot study on the impact of international open science genomics projects on capacity building in R&D in developing countries. Using indicators we developed in previous work to measure the performance of international open science genomics projects, we analyse the policies and practices of four key projects in the field: the International HapMap Project, the Human Heredity and Health in Africa Initiative, the Malaria Genomic Epidemiology Network and the Structural Genomics Consortium. The results show that these projects play an important role in genomics capacity building in developing countries, but play a more limited role with regard to the potential redistribution of the benefits of research to the populations of these countries. We further suggest concrete initiatives that could facilitate the involvement of researchers from developing countries in the international genomics research community and accelerate capacity building in the developing world.

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.

Indigenous Peoples and genomics: Starting a conversation

Compared to European ancestral groups, Indigenous Canadians are more likely to have uninterpretable genome-wide sequencing results due to non-representation in reference databases. We began a conversation with Indigenous Canadians to raise awareness and give voice to this issue. We co-created a video explaining genomic non-representation that included diverse Indigenous view-points. We audio-recorded the focus groups including 30 First Nations, Métis, and Inuit individuals living in Greater Vancouver. After watching an introductory video explaining genomic testing, participants discussed issues surrounding collecting Indigenous genomic data, its control, and usage. Transcripts were analyzed, and participants' quotes representing main themes were incorporated into the introductory video. Indigenous participants discussed data interpretation and gave approval for quote usage. The 20 participants who provided feedback concurred with the thematic interpretation: Systemic racism interlaced most conversations, particularly within the theme of trust. Themes of governance emphasized privacy and fear of discrimination. Some participants thought a separate, Indigenous-controlled database was essential; others recognized advantages of international databases. The theme of implementation included creative ideas to collect Indigenous genomes, but prior approval from Indigenous leaders was emphasized. The final video (https://youtu.be/-wivIBDjoi8) was shared with participants to use as they wish to promote awareness and ongoing discussion of genomic diagnostic inequity.

Genomics for all in the 21st century?

As the field of genomics enters the second decade after the completion of the International Human Genome Project, human genomics research is still far from reflective of the ancestral diversity found in global populations. This special issue of the Journal of Community Genetics brings together a global perspective on the need for researchers and health care professionals to support achievable milestones that will enhance global ancestral diversity in genomic research for the 21st century, and integrate the resulting knowledge into health care that benefits everyone. As the publications in this special issue illustrate, this will require focused community engagement, including often overlooked isolated populations, as well as meaningful integration of genomics and health services across the global landscape. With the advancement of sequencing technology and reduction in the cost, the time has come to address critical barriers.