Attitudes, knowledge and consequences of uncertain genetic findings in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

The Definition of Sarcomeric and Non-Sarcomeric Gene Mutations in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Patients: A Multicenter Diagnostic Study Across Türkiye

BACKGROUND

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a common genetic heart disease and up to 40%-60% of patients have mutations in cardiac sarcomere protein genes. This genetic diagnosis study aimed to detect pathogenic or likely pathogenic sarcomeric and non-sarcomeric gene mutations and to confirm a final molecular diagnosis in patients diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

A total of 392 patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy were included in this nationwide multicenter study conducted at 23 centers across Türkiye. All samples were analyzed with a 17-gene hypertrophic cardiomyopathy panel using next-generation sequencing technology. The gene panel includes ACTC1, DES, FLNC, GLA, LAMP2, MYBPC3, MYH7, MYL2, MYL3, PLN, PRKAG2, PTPN11, TNNC1, TNNI3, TNNT2, TPM1, and TTR genes.

RESULTS

The next-generation sequencing panel identified positive genetic variants (variants of unknown significance, likely pathogenic or pathogenic) in 12 genes for 121 of 392 samples, including sarcomeric gene mutations in 30.4% (119/392) of samples tested, galactosidase alpha variants in 0.5% (2/392) of samples and TTR variant in 0.025% (1/392). The likely pathogenic or pathogenic variants identified in 69 (57.0%) of 121 positive samples yielded a confirmed molecular diagnosis. The diagnostic yield was 17.1% (15.8% for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy variants) for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy phenocopies and 0.5% for Fabry disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the distribution of genetic mutations, the prevalence of Fabry disease, and TTR amyloidosis in the Turkish population diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy were similar to the other populations, but the percentage of sarcomeric gene mutations was slightly lower.

Cancer patients' experience of receiving variant of uncertain significance results: An Asian perspective

Due to a lack of ancestry-matched, functional, and segregation data, Asians have a higher rate of receiving a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) result following panel testing. Managing VUS results presents challenges, as it often leads to increased anxiety and distress among cancer patients undergoing genetic testing. This exploratory study aims to investigate the experience of Asian cancer patients upon receiving a VUS result. A qualitative, semi-structured interview study was conducted, involving cancer patients who had received a VUS result through the Cancer Genetics Service of the National Cancer Centre Singapore. Twenty participants were interviewed, and their responses were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes. Thematic analysis revealed five major themes: (1) VUS results are interpreted as uncertain outcomes; (2) a VUS result provides relief and prompts positive behavioral adjustments; (3) patients employ fatalism and religion as coping mechanisms to navigate uncertainty; (4) genetic counselors, family, and the community offer reassurance and support; (5) patients value updates on variant classifications for future management. While this novel study provides unique insights into the perspectives of Asian patients who receive VUS results, it also highlights patients' effective management of VUS results and uncertainty, which has implications for improving counseling practices in Asia. Emphasis must be placed on accurate interpretation and clear communication of VUS results to dispel the possibility of misconceptions, misdiagnosis, and mismanagement in cancer care.

Interventions to support patients with sharing genetic test results with at-risk relatives: a synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM)

Whilst the finding of heritable susceptibility to disease was once relatively rare, mainstreaming of genetic testing has resulted in a steady increase. Patients are often encouraged to share their genetic test results with relevant relatives, but relatives may not receive this information, leaving them without knowledge of their own risk. Therefore, strategies to help communicate such information are important. This review aimed to explore the efficacy of existing interventions to improve the sharing of genetic test results. A synthesis without meta-analysis design was used. A systematic search of Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and AMED was conducted, and five studies were identified worldwide. Data were extracted for each study regarding study aim, participant characteristics, condition, intervention details, comparison, study duration, outcome measures, theory and behaviour change techniques used. Limited efficacy and application of theory was found. Knowledge, motivation and self-efficacy were not increased in any intervention. No gender differences in communication behaviour were encountered in interventions that recruited men and women. Two studies reported an evaluation of acceptability, which showed that the interventions were well received by patients and health professionals. No study reported the involvement of the target population in any phase of intervention development. Given the lack of health psychology-informed interventions in this area of clinical genetics, we recommend genetic health professionals, health psychologists and patients collaborate on all stages of future interventions that involve the cascading of genetic health information within families. We also provide guidance regarding use of theory and intervention elements for future intervention development.

Perceived self-efficacy and empowerment in patients at increased risk of sudden cardiac arrest

Background

The role of multidisciplinary clinics for psychosocial care is increasingly recognized for those living with inherited cardiac conditions (ICC). In Canada, access to healthcare providers differ between clinics. Little is known about the relationship between access to specialty care and a patient's ability to cope with, and manage their condition.

Methods

We leveraged the Hearts in Rhythm Organization (HiRO) to conduct a cross-sectional, community-based survey of individuals with ICC and their family members. We aimed to describe access to services, and explore the relationships between participants' characteristics, cardiac history and self-reported health status and self-efficacy (GSE: General Self-Efficacy Scale) and empowerment (GCOS-24: Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale).

Results

We collected 235 responses from Canadian participants in 10 provinces and territories. Overall, 63% of participants reported involvement of a genetic counsellor in their care. Access to genetic testing was associated with greater empowerment [mean GCOS-24: 121.14 (SD = 20.53) vs. 105.68 (SD = 21.69); p = 0.004]. Uncertain genetic test results were associated with lower perceived self-efficacy (mean GSE: uncertain = 28.85 vs. positive = 33.16, negative = 34.13; p = 0.01). Low global mental health scores correlated with both lower perceived self-efficacy and empowerment scores, with only 11% of affected participants reporting involvement of psychology services in their care.

Conclusion

Differences in resource accessibility, clinical history and self-reported health status impact the perceived self-efficacy and empowerment of patients with ICC. Future research evaluating interventions to improve patient outcomes is recommended.

Evaluating a communication aid for return of genetic results in families with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: A randomized controlled trial

Genetic testing for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is considered a key aspect of management. Communication of genetic test results to the proband and their family members, can be a barrier to effective uptake. We hypothesized that a communication aid would facilitate effective communication, and sought to evaluate knowledge and communication of HCM risk to at-risk relatives. This was a prospective randomized controlled trial. Consecutive HCM patients attending a specialized clinic, who agreed to participate, were randomized to the intervention or current clinical practice. The intervention consisted of a genetic counselor-led appointment, separate to their clinical cardiology review, and guided by a communication booklet which could be written in and taken home. Current clinical practice was defined as the return of the genetic result by a genetic counselor and cardiologist, often as part of a clinical cardiology review. The primary outcome was the ability and confidence of the individual to communicate genetic results to at-risk relatives. The a priori outcome of improved communication among HCM families did not show statistically significant differences between the control and intervention group, though the majority of probands in the intervention group achieved fair communication (n = 13/22) and had higher genetic knowledge scores than those in the control group (7 ± 3 versus 6 ± 3). A total of 29% of at-risk relatives were not informed of a genetic result in their family. Communication among HCM families remains challenging, with nearly a third of at-risk relatives not informed of a genetic result. We show a significant gap in the current approach to supporting family communication about genetics. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617000706370.

Genetic variants with discordant classifications: An assessment of genetic counselor attitudes and practices

Discordant variant classifications (DVCs) can impact patient care and pose challenges for clinicians. A survey-based study was conducted to examine genetic counselor (GC) attitudes and practices related to DVCs. Most GCs (202/229, 88%) in the study provide direct patient care across clinical specialties; review patients' genetic test results to determine if reported genetic variants have DVCs (176/202, 88%); and inform patients of known DVCs that impact medical management (165/202, 82%). DVC review, which takes 41 min (range: 5-240) on average per week, is typically prompted by the identification of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (160/176, 90%) and is primarily conducted using public databases (176/176, 100%). While most GCs felt it would not be ethical to knowingly provide different medical management recommendations to patients with the same genetic variant (152/229, 66%), they also stated they would rely on the variant classification on the test report (141/229, 61%) and/or the patient's personal/family history (188/229, 82%) to determine which classification to follow if a DVC is identified. Both factors are patient-specific and, inherently, could lead to differing recommendations. When posed with a hypothetical scenario in which two patients have the same genetic variant, but test reports show a DVC (pathogenic vs VUS), most GCs (179/229, 78.2%) stated they would make the same recommendation for both patients regardless of management guidelines. One-third (52/179, 29.1%) cited patient-specific factors, such as personal/family history, would impact their recommendations. Disagreements about whether the pathogenic or VUS classification should be used to make medical management recommendations were noted. Differing practices and opinions on how to manage patients with DVCs, as well as the fact that most GCs (209/229, 91.3%) have consulted with colleagues on this matter, highlight the need for more professional guidance to ensure equitable patient care.

The uptake and utility of genetic testing and genetic counseling for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Genetic testing and genetic counseling are routinely indicated for patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM); however, the uptake and utility of these services is not entirely understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the uptake and utility of genetic counseling and genetic testing for patients with HCM and their at-risk family members, as well as the impact of genetic counseling/testing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). A systematic search was performed through March 12, 2021. Meta-analyses were performed whenever possible; other findings were qualitatively summarized. Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria (47 observational, 1 randomized). Uptake of genetic testing in probands was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40, 73). Uptake of cascade screening for at-risk relatives were as follows: 61% for cascade genetic testing (95% CI: 45, 75), 58% for cardiac screening (e.g. echocardiography) (95% CI: 40, 73), and 69% for either/both approaches (95% CI: 43, 87). In addition, relatives of probands with a positive genetic test result were significantly more likely to undergo cascade screening compared to relatives of probands with a negative result (odds ratio = 3.17, 95% CI: 2.12, 4.76). Overall, uptake of genetic counseling in both probands and relatives ranged from 37% to 84%. Multiple studies found little difference in PROs between individuals receiving positive versus negative genetic test results; however, other studies found that individuals with positive genetic test results experienced worse psychological outcomes. Genetic testing may also inform life choices, particularly decisions related to reproduction and insurance. Genetic counseling was associated with high satisfaction, increased perceived personal control and empowerment, and decreased anxiety. Approximately half to three-quarters of patients with HCM and their relatives undergo genetic testing or cascade screening. PROs after genetic testing varied and genetic counseling was associated with high satisfaction and improved PROs.

2020 APHRS/HRS expert consensus statement on the investigation of decedents with sudden unexplained death and patients with sudden cardiac arrest, and of their families

This international multidisciplinary document intends to provide clinicians with evidence-based practical patient-centered recommendations for evaluating patients and decedents with (aborted) sudden cardiac arrest and their families. The document includes a framework for the investigation of the family allowing steps to be taken, should an inherited condition be found, to minimize further events in affected relatives. Integral to the process is counseling of the patients and families, not only because of the emotionally charged subject, but because finding (or not finding) the cause of the arrest may influence management of family members. The formation of multidisciplinary teams is essential to provide a complete service to the patients and their families, and the varied expertise of the writing committee was formulated to reflect this need. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. The recommendations were opened for public comment and reviewed by the relevant scientific and clinical document committees of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); the document underwent external review and endorsement by the partner and collaborating societies. While the recommendations are for optimal care, it is recognized that not all resources will be available to all clinicians. Nevertheless, this document articulates the evaluation that the clinician should aspire to provide for patients with sudden cardiac arrest, decedents with sudden unexplained death, and their families.

2020 APHRS/HRS expert consensus statement on the investigation of decedents with sudden unexplained death and patients with sudden cardiac arrest, and of their families

This international multidisciplinary document intends to provide clinicians with evidence-based practical patient-centered recommendations for evaluating patients and decedents with (aborted) sudden cardiac arrest and their families. The document includes a framework for the investigation of the family allowing steps to be taken, should an inherited condition be found, to minimize further events in affected relatives. Integral to the process is counseling of the patients and families, not only because of the emotionally charged subject, but because finding (or not finding) the cause of the arrest may influence management of family members. The formation of multidisciplinary teams is essential to provide a complete service to the patients and their families, and the varied expertise of the writing committee was formulated to reflect this need. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. The recommendations were opened for public comment and reviewed by the relevant scientific and clinical document committees of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); the document underwent external review and endorsement by the partner and collaborating societies. While the recommendations are for optimal care, it is recognized that not all resources will be available to all clinicians. Nevertheless, this document articulates the evaluation that the clinician should aspire to provide for patients with sudden cardiac arrest, decedents with sudden unexplained death, and their families.

Clinical and psychological outcomes of receiving a variant of uncertain significance from multigene panel testing or genomic sequencing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This study systematically reviewed and synthesized the literature on psychological and clinical outcomes of receiving a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) from multigene panel testing or genomic sequencing. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched. Two reviewers screened studies and extracted data. Data were synthesized through meta-analysis and meta-aggregation. The search identified 4539 unique studies and 15 were included in the review. Patients with VUS reported higher genetic test-specific concerns on the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) scale than patients with negative results (mean difference 3.73 [95% CI 0.80 to 6.66] P = 0.0126), and lower than patients with positive results (mean difference -7.01 [95% CI -11.31 to -2.71], P = 0.0014). Patients with VUS and patients with negative results were similarly likely to have a change in their clinical management (OR 1.41 [95% CI 0.90 to 2.21], P = 0.182), and less likely to have a change in management than patients with positive results (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.19], P < 0.0001). Factors that contributed to how patients responded to their VUS included their interpretation of the result and their health-care provider's counseling and recommendations. Review findings suggest there may be a need for practice guidelines or clinical decision support tools for VUS disclosure and management.

Evaluation of Clinical Practices Related to Variants of Uncertain Significance Results in Inherited Cardiac Arrhythmia and Inherited Cardiomyopathy Genes

Background:

Increasing use of genetic tests have identified many variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in genes associated with inherited arrhythmias and cardiomyopathies. Evaluation of clinical practices, including medical management recommendations for VUS patients and their families, is important to prevent over- or under-treatment that may result in morbidity or mortality. The purpose of this study is to describe practices related to VUS results including information and medical management recommendations providers give patients and their families.

Methods:

An anonymous online survey was distributed to genetic counselors (GCs) and cardiologists who have seen at least one patient for inherited arrhythmias or cardiomyopathies. The survey explored providers’ confidence in counseling, explanation of VUSs, topics covered before and after genetic testing, and clinical recommendations using a hypothetical scenario maximizing uncertainty with an unclear clinical and molecular diagnosis. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and median confidence and likelihood of making various medical recommendations were compared across provider type.

Results:

Providers (N=102) who completed the survey included 29 cardiovascular GCs, 50 GCs from other specialties, and 23 cardiologists. GCs feel more confident than cardiologists counseling about VUS results ( P <0.001); while both cardiovascular GCs and cardiologists feel more confident than other GCs in providing input regarding medical management recommendations ( P =0.001 and P =0.01, respectively). Cardiologists were more likely than cardiac GCs to recommend clinical testing for family members even though testing in the scenario is expected to be uninformative.

Conclusions:

These findings illustrate how the expertise of different providers may impact decision processes, suggesting the need for interdisciplinary clinics to optimize care for challenging cases.

Mind the gap: Knowledge deficits in evaluating young sudden cardiac death

Sudden cardiac arrest affects around half a million people aged under 50 years old annually, with a 90% mortality rate. Despite high patient numbers and clear clinical need to improve outcomes, many gaps exist in the evidence underpinning patients' management. Domains identifying the greatest barriers to conducting trials are the prehospital and forensic settings, which also provide care to the majority of patients. Addressing gaps in evidence along each point of the cardiac arrest trajectory is a key clinical priority.

A Person-Centered Approach to Cardiovascular Genetic Testing

Cardiovascular genetic counselors provide guidance to people facing the reality or prospect of inherited cardiovascular conditions. Key activities in this role include discussing clinical cardiac screening for at-risk family members and offering genetic testing. Psychological factors often influence whether patients choose to have genetic testing and how they understand and communicate the results to at-risk relatives, so psychological counseling increases the impact of genetic education and medical recommendations. This work reviews the literature on the factors that influence patient decisions about cardiovascular genetic testing and the psychological impact of results on people who opt to test. It also models use of a psychological framework to apply themes from the literature to routine cardiovascular genetic counseling practice. Modifications of the framework are provided to show how it can be adapted to serve the needs of both new and experienced genetic counselors.

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.

Pre-Test Probability and Genes and Variants of Uncertain Significance in Familial Long QT Syndrome

The genetics underlying familial long QT syndrome (LQTS) are among the best characterised of all of the inherited heart conditions. Cohort and registry studies have demonstrated important genotype-phenotype correlations that are now essential in guiding clinical practice of patients with the most common three genotypes; KCNQ1 (LQT type 1), KCNH2 (LQT type 2) and SCN5A (LQT type 3). However, the growing number of genes-now more than 16-is confusing, and there is much doubt as to whether many actually cause LQTS at all. Furthermore, changes in sequencing techniques, evolving variant classification criteria and new scientific discoveries make all genes and variants subject to a continuous process of re-classification. This review discusses the nature of variant adjudication, the important concept of pre-test probability in interpreting a genetic result and how the nomenclature of LQTS is shifting in response to this new knowledge. It further discusses the role of deep phenotyping, the inclusion of evaluation of family members in interpreting a genetic test result, or even deciding if genetic testing should occur at all, and the role of specialist multidisciplinary teams to translate this continuously evolving knowledge into the best clinical advice, in partnership with referring cardiologists.

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.

Evaluating a custom-designed aid to improve communication of genetic results in families with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Genetic testing for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in the era of genomics brings unique challenges for genetic counselling. The number of genes routinely included in an HCM gene panel has increased markedly, many with minimal if any robust evidence of gene-disease association. Subsequently, there is a greater chance of uncertain genetic findings. The responsibility of communicating this information with at-risk relatives lies with the index case (proband). We have developed a communication aid to assist with the delivery of genetic results to the proband. We have previously shown the aid is feasible and acceptable and have now developed a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a genetic counsellor-led intervention incorporating the communication aid.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective randomised controlled trial. We will investigate the impact of a genetic counsellor-led intervention to return proband genetic results using a custom-designed communication aid. We aim to improve knowledge and empowerment. The primary outcome of this trial is the ability and confidence of the proband to communicate genetic results to at-risk relatives. Secondary outcomes will assess genetic knowledge, satisfaction with services, outcomes from genetic counselling and psychological adaptation to genetic information.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by and is in strict accordance with the Sydney Local Health District Ethics Review Committee (X16-0030; 22/01/2016; version 1). Results from this trial will be prepared as a manuscript and submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication as well as submission for presentation at national and international meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12617000706370.

Detection of copy number variants using chromosomal microarray analysis for the prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart defects with normal karyotype

BACKGROUND

With the increasing availability of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for congenital heart defect (CHD), genetic testing now faces new challenges due to results with uncertain clinical impact. Studies are needed to better define the penetrance of genetic variants. The aim of the study was to examine the association between CMA and CHDs in fetuses with normal karyotype.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 190 fetuses with normal karyotype that underwent CMA after a diagnosis of CHD by fetal ultrasound. Invasive prenatal diagnosis was performed between January 2015 and December 2016 at the first affiliated hospital of Air Force Medical University.

RESULTS

Chromosomal microarray analysis detected pathogenic copy number variants (pCNVs) in 13/190 (6.84%) fetuses, likely pCNVs in 5/190 (2.63%), and variants of unknown significance (VOUS) in 14/190 (7.37%). Among those with pCNVs, none (0%) yielded a normal live birth. Among those with likely pCNVs, 2/5 (40.0%) yielded a live birth. Among the fetuses with VOUS, 10/14 (71.5%) yielded a live birth.

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the usefulness of CMA for prenatal genetic diagnosis of fetuses with CHDs and normal karyotype. In fetuses with CHD, the application of CMA could increase the detection rate of pCNVs causing CHDs. In this study, some VOUS were likely pathogenic, but additional studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Examining the Psychosocial Impact of Genetic Testing for Cardiomyopathies

Inherited cardiomyopathies, including hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), are the most common monogenic cause of cardiac disease and can rarely lead to sudden cardiac death (SCD). They are characterized by incomplete and age-dependent penetrance and are usually initially symptomatic in adulthood yet can present in childhood as well. Over 20 genes have been identified to cause HCM, and more than 40 genes are known to cause DCM. Genetic testing for these genes has been integrated into medical care; however, the psychological impact of genetic testing and the impact of the uncertainty that comes with receiving these results have not been well studied. This study surveyed 90 adult probands and relatives with a personal or family history of cardiomyopathy from a single hospital-based cardiac genetic program to determine the psychosocial impact of genetic testing for cardiomyopathies. Standardized psychological instruments including an adapted Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (aMICRA), Impact of Event Scale (IES), and Satisfaction with Decision (SWD) scales were utilized. Patients with positive genetic test results had higher scores for intrusive thoughts, avoidance, and distress when compared to those with negative genetic test results and were also more likely to make or plan to make life changes because of the results of their genetic testing. Satisfaction with the decision to undergo genetic testing was similar regardless of genetic test results. The results of this study provide insight into the patient experience of genetic testing for cardiomyopathies and how these experiences are associated with genetic test results and cardiac history.

Communication of genetic information to families with inherited rhythm disorders

Given the dynamic nature of the electrical activity of the heart and ongoing challenges in the diagnostics of inherited heart rhythm disorders, genetic information can be a vital aspect of family management. Communication of genetic information is complex, and the responsibility to convey this information to the family lies with the proband. Current practice falls short, requiring additional support from the clinician and multidisciplinary team. Communication is a 2-part iterative process, reliant on both the understanding of the probands and their ability to effectively communicate with relatives. With the surge of high-throughput genetic testing, results generated are increasingly complex, making the task of communication more challenging. Here we discuss 3 key issues. First, the probabilistic nature of genetic test results means uncertainty is inherent to the practice. Second, secondary findings may arise. Third, personal preferences, values, and family dynamics also come into play and must be acknowledged when considering how best to support effective communication. Here we provide insight into the challenges and provide practical advice for clinicians to support effective family communication. These strategies include acknowledging and managing genetic uncertainty, genetic counseling and informed consent, and consideration of personal and familial barriers to effective communication. We will explore the potential for developing resources to assist clinicians in providing patients with sufficient knowledge and support to communicate complex information to their at-risk relatives. Specialized multidisciplinary clinics remain the best equipped to manage patients and families with inherited heart rhythm disorders given the need for a high level of information and support.