Exome and Genome Sequencing and Parallels in Radiology: Searching for Patient-Centered Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings

Indeterminate Prenatal Ultrasounds and Maternal Anxiety: A Prospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Prenatal ultrasounds often yield indeterminate (incomplete or minor abnormality) findings with limited clinical utility. We evaluate impact of indeterminate findings on maternal anxiety.

METHODS

A single-U.S.-center prospective cohort study administered the Perinatal Anxiety Screening Scale (PASS; control mean = 13.4; > 20 denotes clinically significant anxiety) before and after prenatal ultrasounds in February-May 2017. Ultrasound reports were coded as: normal; indeterminate; or major abnormality. Primary outcome was anxiety after indeterminate vs. normal ultrasounds. Secondary outcomes included anxiety change from pre-to-post-ultrasound and relative to women's characteristics. Linear regression adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Of 286 ultrasounds, 51.0% were normal, 40.5% indeterminate (22.0% incomplete; 18.5% minor abnormality), and 8.0% major abnormalities. Indeterminate findings were unrelated to age, race, parity, infertility, or psychiatric history, but associated with gestational age (26.6%/45.0%/52.5% for first/second/third trimesters; p < 0.001), and obesity (48.8 vs. 37.0%; p = 0.031). Pretest anxiety was highest in second/third trimesters (p = 0.029), and in subjects aged age ≤ 24 or younger(p < 0.001), with a history of anxiety (p < 0.001),) or with prior pregnancy loss (p = 0.011). Mean anxiety score decreased pre-to-posttest across all groups. Indeterminate findings were associated with higher PASS scores than normal findings: pretest 20.1 vs. 16.4 (p = 0.026) and posttest 16.9 vs. 12.2 (p = 0.009; adjusted-p = 0.01). Versus normal ultrasounds, incomplete findings were associated with higher post-ultrasound anxiety (p = 0.007; adjusted-p = 0.01) and smaller decreases from pre-to-posttest (adjusted-p = 0.03), whereas minor abnormalities had higher pretest anxiety (p = 0.029) with larger pre-to-posttest decreases (adjusted-p =0.010).

DISCUSSION

Indeterminate ultrasounds, especially incomplete findings, are associated with significantly higher anxiety than normal findings, suggesting need for evidence-based counseling, management and strategies for decreasing number of indeterminate results.

Patients' Views About the Disclosure of Collateral Findings in Pragmatic Clinical Trials: a Focus Group Study

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are increasingly being conducted to efficiently generate evidence to inform healthcare decision-making. Despite their growing acceptance, PCTs may involve a variety of ethical issues, including the management of pragmatic clinical trial-collateral findings (PCT-CFs), that is, information that emerges in PCTs that is unrelated to the primary research questions but may have implications for patients, clinicians, and health systems.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand patients' views about PCT-CF disclosure, including how, by whom, and the nature and extent of information provided.

DESIGN

Prospective, qualitative focus group study.

PARTICIPANTS

Focus groups were conducted in Baltimore, MD; Houston, TX; and Seattle, WA (overall N = 66), during July and August 2019.

APPROACH

All groups discussed a hypothetical scenario involving the detection of a PCT-CF of contraindicated medications. Participants were asked about their reactions to the PCT-CF and issues related to its disclosure.

KEY RESULTS

Reactions to learning about the PCT-CF were mixed, ranging from fear of a significant health problem, anger that the contraindicated medications had gone unnoticed and/or for being included in research without their permission, to gratitude for the information. Preferences for how such disclosures are made varied but were driven by several consistent desires, namely minimizing patient harm and anxiety and demonstrating trust and respect. Many wanted their treating clinician to be informed of the PCT-CF so that they would be prepared to answer patients' questions and to discuss treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection of PCT-CFs is likely to increase with further expansion of PCTs. As such, clinicians will undoubtedly become involved in the management of PCT-CFs. Our data illustrate some of the challenges clinicians may face when their patients are informed of a PCT-CF and the need to develop guidance for disclosing PCT-CFs in ways that align with patients' preferences and values.

Ethics and Collateral Findings in Pragmatic Clinical Trials

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) offer important benefits, such as generating evidence that is suited to inform real-world health care decisions and increasing research efficiency. However, PCTs also present ethical challenges. One such challenge involves the management of information that emerges in a PCT that is unrelated to the primary research question(s), yet may have implications for the individual patients, clinicians, or health care systems from whom or within which research data were collected. We term these findings as ?pragmatic clinical trial collateral findings,? or ?PCT-CFs?. In this article, we explore the ethical considerations associated with the identification, assessment, and management of PCT-CFs, and how these considerations may vary based upon the attributes of a specific PCT. Our purpose is to map the terrain of PCT-CFs to serve as a foundation for future scholarship as well as policy-making and to facilitate careful deliberation about actual cases as they occur in practice.

Endocrinology practice patterns of hypothyroidism and osteoporosis management in a U.S. tertiary academic medical center

Background

The major published clinical guidelines for the management of hypothyroidism and osteoporosis are not uniformly consistent and may be a significant contributor to variability of clinical care delivered by endocrinologists, in addition to other factors, such as physician experience, physician and patient perceptions, and patient comorbidities. The purpose of this study was to assess practice patterns of hypothyroidism and osteoporosis within an academic endocrine clinic.

Methods

A retrospective medical record review of the first 200 adult patients (n = 100 with primary hypothyroidism and n = 100 with osteoporosis or osteopenia) seen by an endocrinologist beginning January 2, 2017at a large U.S. urban tertiary academic medical center was performed. Data were collected regarding patient demographics, clinic visit type, patterns of ordering laboratory tests and imaging, and choice of pharmacologic treatment.

Results

Most patients with hypothyroidism (99%) had a serum thyroid stimulating hormone concentration measured. Other thyroid indices measured included serum total thyroxine (10%), serum free thyroxine [T4] (82%), serum free T4 index (6%), serum total triiodothyronine [T3] (9%), and serum free T3 (12%). Forty-eight percent also had serum thyroid antibodies checked. A variety of thyroid hormone supplements were used to treat hypothyroidism, including levothyroxine (83%), levothyroxine and liothyronine combination (8%), and desiccated thyroid extract (6%). In regards to patients with osteoporosis, mean duration of all pharmacologic therapy combined was 73.4 ± 81.9 months. For those with more than one bone density (DXA) scans (64%), the mean time interval between two consecutive DXA scans was variable (mean 32.0 ± 24.7 [SD] months). Sixty eight percent of the patients had bone turnover markers assessed within 7 months of the visit.

Conclusions

This study reports a real-world experience of endocrinology practice patterns at a large U.S. academic healthcare system. For the common diagnoses of hypothyroidism and osteoporosis, there are opportunities for increased standardization of care, particularly regarding the ordering of laboratory testing and radiologic studies. Identifying areas with significant practice variability may improve the quality and health outcomes and reduce the cost of care for patients with these conditions. Increased understanding regarding the reasons behind ordering various studies may help physician and patients further align their goals.

Anticipated responses of early adopter genetic specialists and nongenetic specialists to unsolicited genomic secondary findings

PURPOSE

Secondary findings from genomic sequencing are becoming more common. We compared how health-care providers with and without specialized genetics training anticipated responding to different types of secondary findings.

METHODS

Providers with genomic sequencing experience reviewed five secondary-findings reports and reported attitudes and potential clinical follow-up. Analyses compared genetic specialists and physicians without specialized genetics training, and examined how responses varied by secondary finding.

RESULTS

Genetic specialists scored higher than other providers on four-point scales assessing understandings of reports (3.89 vs. 3.42, p = 0.0002), and lower on scales assessing reporting obligations (2.60 vs. 3.51, p < 0.0001) and burdens of responding (1.73 vs. 2.70, p < 0.0001). Nearly all attitudes differed between findings, although genetic specialists were more likely to assert that laboratories had no obligations when findings had less-established actionability (p < 0.0001 in interaction tests). The importance of reviewing personal and family histories, documenting findings, learning more about the variant, and recommending familial discussions also varied according to finding (all p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Genetic specialists felt better prepared to respond to secondary findings than providers without specialized genetics training, but perceived fewer obligations for laboratories to report them, and the two groups anticipated similar clinical responses. Findings may inform development of targeted education and support.