Experiences of patients seeking to participate in variant of uncertain significance reclassification research

Implications of genetic testing and informed consent before and after genetic testing in individuals with cancer

Recent advancements in next generation sequencing have allowed for genetic information become more readily available in the clinical setting for those affected by cancer and by treating clinicians. Given the lack of access to geneticists, medical oncologists and other treating physicians have begun ordering and interpreting genetic tests for individuals with cancer through the process of "mainstreaming". While this process has allowed for quicker access to genetic tests, the process of "mainstreaming" has also brought several challenges including the dissemination of variants of unknown significance results, ordering of appropriate tests, and accurate interpretation of genetic results with appropriate follow-up testing and interventions. In this editorial, we seek to explore the process of informed consent of individuals before obtaining genetic testing and offer potential solutions to optimize the informed consent process including categorization of results as well as a layered consent model.

Discussion of off-target and tentative genomic findings may sometimes be necessary to allow evaluation of their clinical significance

We discuss a case where clinical genomic investigation of muscle weakness unexpectedly found a genetic variant that might (or might not) predispose to kidney cancer. We argue that despite its off-target and uncertain nature, this variant should be discussed with the man who had the test, not because it is medical information, but because this discussion would allow the further clinical evaluation that might lead it to becoming so. We argue that while prominent ethical debates around genomics often take 'results' as a starting point and ask questions as to whether to look for and how to react to them, the construction of genomic results is fraught with ethical complexity, although often couched as a primarily technical problem. We highlight the need for greater focus on, and appreciation of, the ethical work undertaken daily by scientists and clinicians working in genomic medicine and discuss how public conversations around genomics need to adapt to prepare future patients for potentially uncertain and unexpected outcomes from clinical genomic tests.

Variant reclassification and clinical implications

Genomic technologies have transformed clinical genetic testing, underlining the importance of accurate molecular genetic diagnoses. Variant classification, ranging from benign to pathogenic, is fundamental to these tests. However, variant reclassification, the process of reassigning the pathogenicity of variants over time, poses challenges to diagnostic legitimacy. This review explores the medical and scientific literature available on variant reclassification, focusing on its clinical implications.Variant reclassification is driven by accruing evidence from diverse sources, leading to variant reclassification frequency ranging from 3.6% to 58.8%. Recent studies have shown that significant changes can occur when reviewing variant classifications within 1 year after initial classification, illustrating the importance of early, accurate variant assignation for clinical care.Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are particularly problematic. They lack clear categorisation but have influenced patient treatment despite recommendations against it. Addressing VUS reclassification is essential to enhance the credibility of genetic testing and the clinical impact. Factors affecting reclassification include standardised guidelines, clinical phenotype-genotype correlations through deep phenotyping and ancestry studies, large-scale databases and bioinformatics tools. As genomic databases grow and knowledge advances, reclassification rates are expected to change, reducing discordance in future classifications.Variant reclassification affects patient diagnosis, precision therapy and family screening. The exact patient impact is yet unknown. Understanding influencing factors and adopting standardised guidelines are vital for precise molecular genetic diagnoses, ensuring optimal patient care and minimising clinical risk.

The frequency of pathogenic variation in the All of Us cohort reveals ancestry-driven disparities

Disparities in data underlying clinical genomic interpretation is an acknowledged problem, but there is a paucity of data demonstrating it. The All of Us Research Program is collecting data including whole-genome sequences, health records, and surveys for at least a million participants with diverse ancestry and access to healthcare, representing one of the largest biomedical research repositories of its kind. Here, we examine pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants that were identified in the All of Us cohort. The European ancestry subgroup showed the highest overall rate of pathogenic variation, with 2.26% of participants having a pathogenic variant. Other ancestry groups had lower rates of pathogenic variation, including 1.62% for the African ancestry group and 1.32% in the Latino/Admixed American ancestry group. Pathogenic variants were most frequently observed in genes related to Breast/Ovarian Cancer or Hypercholesterolemia. Variant frequencies in many genes were consistent with the data from the public gnomAD database, with some notable exceptions resolved using gnomAD subsets. Differences in pathogenic variant frequency observed between ancestral groups generally indicate biases of ascertainment of knowledge about those variants, but some deviations may be indicative of differences in disease prevalence. This work will allow targeted precision medicine efforts at revealed disparities.

Unraveling the functional consequences of a novel germline missense mutation (R38C) in the yeast model of succinate dehydrogenase subunit B: insights into neurodegenerative disorders

This study explores the implications of a novel germline missense mutation (R38C) in the succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) subunit B, which has been linked to neurodegenerative diseases. The mutation was identified from the SDH mutation database and corresponds to the SDH2R32C allele, mirroring the human SDHBR38C mutation. By subjecting the mutant yeast model to hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) stress, simulating oxidative stress, we observed heightened sensitivity to oxidative conditions. Quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis revealed significant regulation (p < 0.05) of genes associated with antioxidant systems and energy metabolism. Through gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis, we examined yeast cell metabolites under oxidative stress, uncovering insights into the potential protective role of o-vanillin. This study elucidates the biological mechanisms underlying cellular oxidative stress responses, offering valuable insights into its repercussions. These findings shed light on innovative avenues for addressing neurodegenerative diseases, potentially revolutionizing therapeutic strategies.

PhenoScore quantifies phenotypic variation for rare genetic diseases by combining facial analysis with other clinical features using a machine-learning framework

Several molecular and phenotypic algorithms exist that establish genotype-phenotype correlations, including facial recognition tools. However, no unified framework that investigates both facial data and other phenotypic data directly from individuals exists. We developed PhenoScore: an open-source, artificial intelligence-based phenomics framework, combining facial recognition technology with Human Phenotype Ontology data analysis to quantify phenotypic similarity. Here we show PhenoScore's ability to recognize distinct phenotypic entities by establishing recognizable phenotypes for 37 of 40 investigated syndromes against clinical features observed in individuals with other neurodevelopmental disorders and show it is an improvement on existing approaches. PhenoScore provides predictions for individuals with variants of unknown significance and enables sophisticated genotype-phenotype studies by testing hypotheses on possible phenotypic (sub)groups. PhenoScore confirmed previously known phenotypic subgroups caused by variants in the same gene for SATB1, SETBP1 and DEAF1 and provides objective clinical evidence for two distinct ADNP-related phenotypes, already established functionally.

Clinical utility of periodic reinterpretation of CNVs of uncertain significance: an 8-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Array-CGH is the first-tier genetic test both in pre- and postnatal developmental disorders worldwide. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) represent around 10~15% of reported copy number variants (CNVs). Even though VUS reanalysis has become usual in practice, no long-term study regarding CNV reinterpretation has been reported.

METHODS

This retrospective study examined 1641 CGH arrays performed over 8 years (2010-2017) to demonstrate the contribution of periodically re-analyzing CNVs of uncertain significance. CNVs were classified using AnnotSV on the one hand and manually curated on the other hand. The classification was based on the 2020 American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 1641 array-CGH analyzed, 259 (15.7%) showed at least one CNV initially reported as of uncertain significance. After reinterpretation, 106 of the 259 patients (40.9%) changed categories, and 12 of 259 (4.6%) had a VUS reclassified to likely pathogenic or pathogenic. Six were predisposing factors for neurodevelopmental disorder/autism spectrum disorder (ASD). CNV type (gain or loss) does not seem to impact the reclassification rate, unlike the length of the CNV: 75% of CNVs downgraded to benign or likely benign are less than 500 kb in size.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's high rate of reinterpretation suggests that CNV interpretation has rapidly evolved since 2010, thanks to the continuous enrichment of available databases. The reinterpreted CNV explained the phenotype for ten patients, leading to optimal genetic counseling. These findings suggest that CNVs should be reinterpreted at least every 2 years.

Experiences of individuals with a variant of uncertain significance on genetic testing for hereditary cancer risks: a mixed method systematic review

The expansion of Multi-Gene Panel Testing (MGPT) has led to increased detection of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) among individuals with personal or family history of cancer. However, having a VUS result can impact on emotional and psychological wellbeing and cause challenges for non-geneticist healthcare providers. The purpose of this mixed methods systematic review was to examine what is currently known about the experiences of individuals with a VUS on genetic testing for inherited cancer susceptibility. The initial search was conducted in June 2020 using PUBMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsychInfo according to the Joanna Briggs methodology for systematic reviews. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies included in this review identified a range of emotional reactions to a VUS result, a general lack of understanding of a VUS result and its implications, frustration with a lack of healthcare provider knowledge, and a need for clear communication with healthcare providers. This review identified critical gaps in current knowledge to guide genetic counseling praxis, specifically in the knowledge of communication patterns and methods of improving communication with healthcare providers and family members and preferred risk management strategies. This will help to improve the counseling process and the management of care during and after genetic testing.

Is there a way to reduce the inequity in variant interpretation on the basis of ancestry?

The underrepresentation of non-European ancestry groups in current genomic databases complicates interpretation of their genetic test results, yielding a much higher prevalence of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs). Such VUS findings can frustrate the goals of genetic testing, create anxiety in patients, and lead to unnecessary medical interventions. Approaches to addressing underrepresentation of people with genetic ancestries other than European are being undertaken by broad-based recruitment efforts. However, some underrepresented groups have concerns that might preclude participation in such efforts. We describe here two initiatives aimed at meeting the needs of underrepresented ancestry groups in genomic datasets. The two communities, the Sephardi Jewish community in New York and First Peoples of Canada, have very different concerns about contributing to genomic research and datasets. Sephardi concerns focus on the possible negative effects of genetic findings on the marriage prospects of family members. Canadian Indigenous populations seek control over the research uses to which their genetic data would be put. Both cases involve targeted efforts to respond to the groups' concerns; these efforts include governance models aimed at ensuring that the data are used primarily to inform clinical test analyses and at achieving successful engagement and participation of community members. We suggest that these initiatives could provide models for other ancestral groups seeking to improve the accuracy and utility of clinical genetic testing while respecting the underlying preferences and values of community members with regard to the use of their genetic data.

Evolution of germline TP53 variant classification in children with cancer

Li-Fraumeni syndrome, caused by germline pathogenic variants in TP53, results in susceptibility to multiple cancers. Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and reclassification of variants over time pose management concerns given improved survival with cancer surveillance for LFS patients. We describe the experience of TP53 variant reclassification at a pediatric cancer center.

METHODS

We reviewed medical records (2010-2019) of 756 patients seen in Texas Children's Cancer Genetics Clinic. We noted initial TP53 classification and any reclassifications. We then classified TP53 variants following ClinGen TP53 variant curation expert panel recommendations using data from ClinVar, medical literature and IARC database.

RESULTS

Of 234 patients tested for TP53, 27 (11.5%) reports contained pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants and 7 (3)% contained VUS. By January 2022, 4 of 6 unique VUS and 2 of 16 unique P/LP variants changed interpretations in ClinVar. Reinterpretation of these 4 VUS in ClinVar matched clinical decision at the time of initial report. Applying TP53 VCEP specifications classified 3 VUS to P/LP/benign, and one pathogenic variant to likely benign.

CONCLUSIONS

Planned review of variant significance is essential, especially for patients with high probability of LFS.

Cancer patients' understandings of genetic variants of uncertain significance in clinical care

Genetic variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) pose a growing challenge for patient communication and care in precision genomic medicine. To better understand patient perspectives of VUSs, we draw on qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 22 cancer patients and individuals with cancer family history who received a VUS result. The majority of patients did not recall receiving VUS results and those who remembered expressed few worries, while respondents who were tested because of a family history of cancer were more concerned about the VUS results. Personal characteristics, medical condition, family history, expectations prior to testing, and motivations for pursuing testing influence the ways patients came to terms with the uncertainty of the VUS result. We conclude by discussing the relevance of the findings to the debate on the responsibility of the patient in checking back for VUS reclassification and to implications for genetic counseling that emphasizes tailoring the pre- and post-test discussion of VUS as appropriate to the patients’ informational as well as emotional needs.

An ethical analysis of divergent clinical approaches to the application of genetic testing for autism and schizophrenia

Genetic testing to identify genetic syndromes and copy number variants (CNVs) via whole genome platforms such as chromosome microarray (CMA) or exome sequencing (ES) is routinely performed clinically, and is considered by a variety of organizations and societies to be a "first-tier" test for individuals with developmental delay (DD), intellectual disability (ID), or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, in the context of schizophrenia, though CNVs can have a large effect on risk, genetic testing is not typically a part of routine clinical care, and no clinical practice guidelines recommend testing. This raises the question of whether CNV testing should be similarly performed for individuals with schizophrenia. Here we consider this proposition in light of the history of genetic testing for ID/DD and ASD, and through the application of an ethical analysis designed to enable robust, accountable and justifiable decision-making. Using a systematic framework and application of relevant bioethical principles (beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice), our examination highlights that while CNV testing for the indication of ID has considerable benefits, there is currently insufficient evidence to suggest that overall, the potential harms are outweighed by the potential benefits of CNV testing for the sole indications of schizophrenia or ASD. However, although the application of CNV tests for children with ASD or schizophrenia without ID/DD is, strictly speaking, off-label use, there may be clinical utility and benefits substantive enough to outweigh the harms. Research is needed to clarify the harms and benefits of testing in pediatric and adult contexts. Given that genetic counseling has demonstrated benefits for schizophrenia, and has the potential to mitigate many of the potential harms from genetic testing, any decisions to implement genetic testing for schizophrenia should involve high-quality evidence-based genetic counseling.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Genetic Access Program: Paving the Way for Genetic Characterization of ALS in the Clinic

Objective

To report the frequency of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) genetic variants in a nationwide cohort of clinic-based patients with ALS with a family history of ALS (fALS), dementia (dALS), or both ALS and dementia (fALS/dALS).

Methods

A multicenter, prospective cohort of 573 patients with fALS, dALS, or fALS/dALS, underwent genetic testing in the ALS Genetic Access Program (ALS GAP), a clinical program for clinics of the Northeast ALS Consortium. Patients with dALS underwent C9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion (HRE) testing; those with fALS or fALS/dALS underwent C9orf72 HRE testing, followed by sequencing of SOD1, FUS, TARDBP, TBK1, and VCP.

Results

A pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) variant was identified in 171/573 (30%) of program participants. About half of patients with fALS or fALS/dALS (138/301, 45.8%) had either a C9orf72 HRE or a P or LP variant identified in SOD1, FUS, TARDBP, TBK1, or VCP. The use of a targeted, 5-gene sequencing panel resulted in far fewer uncertain test outcomes in familial cases compared with larger panels used in other in clinic-based cohorts. Among dALS cases 11.8% (32/270) were found to have the C9orf72 HRE. Patients of non-Caucasian geoancestry were less likely to test positive for the C9orf72 HRE, but were more likely to test positive on panel testing, compared with those of Caucasian ancestry.

Conclusions

The ALS GAP program provided a genetic diagnosis to ∼1 in 3 participants and may serve as a model for clinical genetic testing in ALS.

The genetic counselor's role in management of patients with dyslipidemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The role of genetic testing in diagnosis and management of dyslipidemias continues to grow. Consequently, it is increasingly important for patients to have access to clinicians who have expertise in medical genetics and the psychological implications related to this type of testing. Often a lipidologist has had limited training in this regard, and this review explores the role of the genetic counselor to fill this gap.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genetic counselors are key members of the healthcare team, and their specialized training in medical genetics and counseling allows them to fill this professional knowledge gap within the lipid clinic.

SUMMARY

With the continued emphasis on precision medicine, the utility of genetic testing for dyslipidemias will continue to grow. This will in turn increase the demand for provider expertise in medical genetics and counseling around these complex issues. Integrating a genetic counselor within the lipid clinic provides an ideal management scenario providing patients and families with access to not only medical information but also emotional support regarding their hereditary condition.

GENETIC DUTIES

Most of our genetic information does not change, yet the results of our genetic tests might. Labs reclassify genetic variants in response to advances in genetic science. As a result, a person who took a test in 2010 could take the same test with the same lab in 2020 and get a different result. However, no legal duty requires labs or physicians to inform patients when a lab reclassifies a variant, even if the reclassification communicates clinically actionable information. This Article considers the need for such duties and their potential challenges. In so doing, it offers much-needed guidance to physicians and labs, who may face liability, and to courts, which will hear these cases.

Patient perspectives on variant reclassification after cancer susceptibility testing

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the impact of reclassification on patients' perception of medical uncertainty or trust in genetics-based clinical care.

METHODS

Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 20 patients who had received a reclassified genetic test result related to hereditary cancer. All participants had undergone genetic counseling and testing for cancer susceptibility at Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center Hereditary Cancer Clinic within the last six years.

RESULTS

Most of the participants did not express distress related to the variant reclassification and only a minority expressed a decrease in trust in medical genetics. However, recall of the new interpretation was limited, even though all participants were recontacted by letter, phone, or clinic visit.

CONCLUSION

Reclassification of genetic tests is an important issue in modern healthcare because changes in interpretation have the potential to alter previously recommended management. Participants in this study did not express strong feelings of mistrust or doubt about their genetic evaluation. However, there was a low level of comprehension and information retention related to the updated report. Future research can build on this study to improve communication with patients about their reclassified results.

Patients' views on variants of uncertain significance across indications

As genomic sequencing expands into more areas of patient care, an increasing number of patients learn of the variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) that they carry. Understanding the potential psychosocial consequences of the disclosure of a VUS can help inform pre- and post-test counseling discussions. Medical uncertainty in general elicits a variety of responses from patients, particularly in the growing field of medical genetics and genomics. It is important to consider patients' responses to the ambiguous nature of VUSs across different indications and situational contexts. Genetic counselors and other providers ordering genetic testing should be prepared for the possibility of their patients' misinterpretation of such results. Pre-test counseling should include a discussion of the possibility of VUSs and what it would mean for the patient's care and its potential psychosocial impacts. When a VUS is found, post-test counseling should include additional education and a discussion of the variant's implications and medical management recommendations based on the results. These discussions may help temper subjective interpretations, unrealistic views, and decisional regret.

Exploring relatives' perceptions of participation, ethics, and communication in a patient-driven study for hereditary cancer variant reclassification

Effective communication of genetic information within families depends on several factors. Few studies explore intra-familial communication of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) results or active collaboration between family members to classify VUS. Our qualitative study aimed to describe the experiences of individuals asked by family members to participate in the FindMyVariant study, a patient-driven family study which aimed to reclassify a clinically identified familial VUS in a hereditary cancer gene. We collected feedback from 56 individuals from 21 different families through phone interviews and written correspondence, transcribed the interviews, and performed thematic analysis on all text. We describe themes from three main topics: participation, ethical considerations, and study impacts. Participation in the FindMyVariant study, defined as returning a sample for targeted genotyping, was motivated by convenience and a desire to help the family, oneself, and science. Relatives were generally responsive to invitations to participate in FindMyVariant from another family member. Those who declined to participate did so due to concerns about research program confidentiality rather than family dynamics. No major ethical issues arose in response to the patient-driven study structure, and no major changes in stress and anxiety, medical care, or behavior occurred. Participation in patient-driven familial VUS classification studies has a neutral or positive impact on family health communication. While it is important to design studies to minimize familial coercion, intra-familial confidentiality breaches, and misinterpretation of genetic results, these were not major concerns among relatives in this study. Clinicians and laboratories may consider encouraging familial communication about genetic variants using family members as liaisons.

Impact of proactive high-throughput functional assay data on BRCA1 variant interpretation in 3684 patients with breast or ovarian cancer

The clinical utility of BRCA1/2 genotyping was recently extended from the selection of subjects at high risk for hereditary breast and ovary cancer to the identification of candidates for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor treatment. This underscores the importance of accurate interpretation of BRCA1/2 genetic variants and of reducing the number of variants of uncertain significance (VUSs). Two recent studies by Findlay et al. and Starita et al. introduced high-throughput functional assays, and proactively analyzed variants in specific regions regardless of whether they had been previously observed. We retrospectively reviewed all BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline genetic test reports from patients with breast or ovarian cancer examined at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) between September 2011 and December 2018. Variants were assigned pathogenic or benign strong evidence codes according to the functional classification and were reclassified according to the ACMG/AMP 2015 guidelines. Among 3684 patients with available BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline genetic test reports, 429 unique variants (181 from BRCA1) were identified. Of 34 BRCA1 variants intersecting with the data reported by Findlay et al., three missense single-nucleotide variants from four patients (0.11%, 4/3684) were reclassified from VUSs to likely pathogenic variants. Four variants scored as functional were reclassified into benign or likely benign variants. Three variants that overlapped with the data reported by Starita et al. could not be reclassified. In conclusion, proactive high-throughput functional study data are useful for the reclassification of clinically observed VUSs. Integrating additional evidence, including functional assay results, may help reduce the number of VUSs.

Regarding the Yin and Yang of Precision Cancer- Screening and Treatment: Are We Creating a Neglected Majority?

In this commentary, we submit that the current emphasis of precision cancer screening and treatment (PCST) has been to provide and interpret the implications of "positive" screening results for those deemed to be at greatest risk for cancer or most likely to benefit from targeted treatments. This is an important, but proportionately small target group, regardless of the cancer context. Overlooked by this focus is the larger majority of those screened who receive "negative" results. We contend that for optimal dissemination of PCST, the complement of positive and negative results be viewed as an inseparable yin-yang duality with the needs of those who receive negative screening results viewed as important as those deemed to be at highest risk or derive targeted treatment benefit. We describe three areas where communication of negative PCST results warrant particular attention and research consideration: population-based family history screening, germline testing for hereditary cancer syndromes, and tumor testing for targeted cancer treatment decision-making. Without thoughtful consideration of the potential for negative results to have psychological and behavioral influences, there is a potential to create a "neglected majority". This majority may be inclined to misinterpret results, disseminate inaccurate information to family, dismiss the credibility of results, or become disillusioned with existing medical treatments.

Psychosocial problems in women attending French, German and Spanish genetics clinics before and after targeted or multigene testing results: an observational prospective study

OBJECTIVES AND SETTING

Advances in multigene panel testing for cancer susceptibility has increased the complexity of counselling, requiring particular attention to counselees' psychosocial needs. Changes in psychosocial problems before and after genetic testing were prospectively compared between genetic test results in women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic susceptibility in French, German and Spanish clinics.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASURES

Among 752 counselees consecutively approached, 646 (86%) were assessed after the initial genetic consultation (T1), including 510 (68%) affected with breast cancer, of which 460 (61%) were assessed again after receiving the test result (T2), using questionnaires addressing genetic-specific psychosocial problems (Psychosocial Aspects of Hereditary Cancer (PAHC)-six scales). Sociodemographic and clinical data were also collected.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine (17.2%), 19 (4.1%), 259 (56.3%), 44 (9.6%) and 59 (12.8%) women received a BRCA1/2, another high/moderate-risk pathogenic variant (PV), negative uninformative, true negative (TN) or variant of uncertain significance result (VUS), respectively. On multiple regression analyses, compared with women receiving another result, those with a VUS decreased more in psychosocial problems related to hereditary predisposition (eg, coping with the test result) (ß=-0.11, p<0.05) and familial/social issues (eg, risk communication) (ß=-0.13, p<0.05), almost independently from their problems before testing. Women with a PV presented no change in hereditary predisposition problems and, so as women with a TN result, a non-significant increase in familial/social issues. Other PAHC scales (ie, emotions, familial cancer, personal cancer and children-related issues) were not affected by genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

In women tested for breast or ovarian cancer genetic risk in European genetics clinics, psychosocial problems were mostly unaffected by genetic testing. Apart from women receiving a VUS result, those with another test result presented unchanged needs in counselling in particular about hereditary predisposition and familial/social issues.

Perceptions of genetic variant reclassification in patients with inherited cardiac disease

Interpretation of sequence variants is an ongoing challenge and new approaches aim to increase stringency. The reclassification of variants has the potential to alter medical management and elicit psychosocial consequences for patients. The perspective of patients with an inherited cardiac disease and a clinically significant variant reclassification was explored through semi-structured phone interviews. Participants were recruited from two specialized multidisciplinary centers in Canada and Australia. Qualitative analysis was performed through a thematic analysis approach. Fifteen participants were interviewed, including 9 (60%) with an inherited cardiomyopathy and 6 (40%) with an inherited arrhythmia syndrome. Six (40%) patients had a classification upgrade, while 9 (60%) had a downgrade. Four major themes emerged: (1) reactions towards the reclassified variant; (2) impact on decision-making; (3) perception of the reclassification process; and (4) improvement of the reclassification process. Many patients adjusted to the reclassification, however some misunderstood the implications, impacting their responses and decision-making. In conclusion, careful discussion with patients about uncertainty and the potential for reclassification are crucial to ensure a deeper understanding of the outcome of genetic testing and impact on families.