1
|
Blout Zawatsky CL, Leonhard JR, Bell M, Moore MM, Petry NJ, Platt DM, Green RC, Hajek C, Christensen KD. Workforce Considerations When Building a Precision Medicine Program. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12111929. [PMID: 36422106 PMCID: PMC9692406 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12111929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2022] [Revised: 10/11/2022] [Accepted: 11/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper describes one healthcare system’s approach to strategically deploying genetic specialists and pharmacists to support the implementation of a precision medicine program. In 2013, Sanford Health initiated the development of a healthcare system-wide precision medicine program. Here, we report the necessary staffing including the genetic counselors, genetic counseling assistants, pharmacists, and geneticists. We examined the administrative and electronic medical records data to summarize genetic referrals over time as well as the uptake and results of an enterprise-wide genetic screening test. Between 2013 and 2020, the number of genetic specialists employed at Sanford Health increased by 190%, from 10.1 full-time equivalents (FTEs) to 29.3 FTEs. Over the same period, referrals from multiple provider types to genetic services increased by 423%, from 1438 referrals to 7517 referrals. Between 2018 and 2020, 11,771 patients received a genetic screening, with 4% identified with potential monogenic medically actionable predisposition (MAP) findings and 95% identified with at least one informative pharmacogenetic result. Of the MAP-positive patients, 85% had completed a session with a genetics provider. A strategic workforce staffing and deployment allowed Sanford Health to manage a new genetic screening program, which prompted a large increase in genetic referrals. This approach can be used as a template for other healthcare systems interested in the development of a precision medicine program.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carrie L. Blout Zawatsky
- Genomes2People, Department of Medicine (Genetics), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
- Precision Population Health, Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- The MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Jennifer R. Leonhard
- Department of Genetics, Sanford Health, Bemidji, MN 56601, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-218-333-5068
| | - Megan Bell
- Department of Genetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
- Department of Genetic Counseling, Augustana University, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
| | | | - Natasha J. Petry
- Department of Sanford Imagenetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105, USA
| | - Dylan M. Platt
- Department of Genetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
- Department of Genetic Counseling, Augustana University, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
| | - Robert C. Green
- Genomes2People, Department of Medicine (Genetics), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
- Precision Population Health, Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Catherine Hajek
- Department of Genetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
- Sanford School of Medicine, University of South Dakota, Sioux Falls, SD 57117, USA
- Helix, San Mateo, CA 94401, USA
| | - Kurt D. Christensen
- Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- PRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hajek C, Hutchinson AM, Galbraith LN, Green RC, Murray MF, Petry N, Preys CL, Zawatsky CLB, Zoltick ES, Christensen KD. Improved provider preparedness through an 8-part genetics and genomic education program. Genet Med 2022; 24:214-224. [PMID: 34906462 PMCID: PMC9121992 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.08.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 06/25/2021] [Accepted: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Large-scale genetics education appropriate for general practice providers is a growing priority. We describe the content and impact of a mandatory system-wide program implemented at Sanford Health. METHODS The Imagenetics Initiative at Sanford Health developed a 2-year genetics education program with quarterly web-based modules that were mandatory for all physicians and advanced practice providers. Scores of 0 to 5 were calculated for each module on the basis of the number of objectives that the participants reported as fulfilled. In addition, the participants completed surveys before starting and after finishing the education program, which included a 7-item measure scored 7 to 28 on the perceived preparedness to practice genetics. RESULTS Between 2252 and 2822 Sanford Health employees completed each of the 8 quarterly education modules. The ratings were highest for the module about using genomics to improve patient management (mean score = 4.3) and lowest for the module about different types of genetic tests and specialists. The mean perceived preparedness scores increased from 15.7 at pre-education to 19.1 at post-education (P < .001). CONCLUSION Web-based genetics education was highly effective in increasing health care providers' confidence about using genetics. Both comfort with personal knowledge and confidence regarding access to the system's genomic medicine experts increased significantly. The results demonstrate how scalable approaches can improve provider preparedness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Hajek
- Sanford Health Imagenetics, Sioux Falls, SD; Sanford School of Medicine, University of South Dakota, Sioux Falls, SD.
| | | | - Lauren N Galbraith
- Department of Population Medicine, Center for Healthcare Research in Pediatrics (CHERP), Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA
| | - Robert C Green
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA; Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA
| | | | - Natasha Petry
- Sanford Health Imagenetics, Fargo, ND; Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND
| | - Charlene L Preys
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA
| | - Carrie L B Zawatsky
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA
| | - Emilie S Zoltick
- Department of Population Medicine, Center for Healthcare Research in Pediatrics (CHERP), Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Department of Population Medicine, Center for Healthcare Research in Pediatrics (CHERP), Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Galbraith LN, Preys CL, Rehm HL, Scheuner MT, Hajek C, Green RC, Christensen KD. Primary care providers' responses to unsolicited Lynch syndrome secondary findings of varying clinical significance. Genet Med 2021; 23:1977-1983. [PMID: 34113000 PMCID: PMC8487923 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-021-01225-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2021] [Revised: 05/11/2021] [Accepted: 05/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: How primary care providers (PCPs) respond to genomic secondary findings (SFs) of varying clinical significance (pathogenic, uncertain significance (VUS), or benign) is unknown. Methods: We randomized 148 American Academy of Family Physicians members to review three reports with varying significance for Lynch syndrome. Participants provided open-ended responses about the follow-up they would address and organized the SF reports and five other topics in the order they would prioritize responding to them (1=highest priority, 6=lowest priority). Results: PCPs suggested referrals more often for pathogenic variants or VUSs than benign variants (72% vs 16%, p<0.001). PCPs were also more likely to address further workup, like a colonoscopy or EGD, in response to pathogenic variants or VUSs than benign variants (43% vs 4%, p<0.001). The likelihoods of addressing referrals or further workup were similar when PCPs reviewed pathogenic variants and VUSs (both p>0.46). SF reports were prioritized highest for pathogenic variants (2.7 for pathogenic variants, 3.6 for VUSs, 4.3 for benign variants, all p≤0.014). Conclusions: Results suggest that while PCPs appreciated the differences in clinical significance, disclosure of VUSs as SFs would substantially increase downstream health care utilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren N Galbraith
- PRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Charlene L Preys
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.,MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Heidi L Rehm
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Department of Pathology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Maren T Scheuner
- San Francisco Veterans Affairs Health Care System, San Francisco, CA, USA.,Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Pediatrics, and Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Catherine Hajek
- Sanford Health Imagenetics, Sioux Falls, SD, USA.,Sanford School of Medicine, University of South Dakota, Sioux Falls, SD, USA
| | - Robert C Green
- Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.,Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA.,Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.,Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- PRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA. .,Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA. .,Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Katz AE, Nussbaum RL, Solomon BD, Rehm HL, Williams MS, Biesecker LG. Management of Secondary Genomic Findings. Am J Hum Genet 2020; 107:3-14. [PMID: 32619490 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Secondary genomic findings are increasingly being returned to individuals as opportunistic screening results. A secondary finding offers the chance to identify and mitigate disease that may otherwise be unrecognized in an individual. As a form of screening, secondary findings must be considered differently from sequencing results in a diagnostic setting. For these reasons, clinicians should employ an evaluation and long-term management strategy that accounts for both the increased disease risk associated with a secondary finding and the lower positive predictive value of a screening result compared to an indication-based testing result. Here we describe an approach to the clinical evaluation and management of an individual who presents with a secondary finding. This approach enumerates five domains of evaluation-(1) medical history, (2) physical exam, (3) family history, (4) diagnostic phenotypic testing, and (5) variant correlation-through which a clinician can distinguish a molecular finding from a clinicomolecular diagnosis of genomic disease. With this framework, both geneticists and non-geneticist clinicians can optimize their ability to detect and mitigate genomic disease while avoiding the pitfalls of overdiagnosis. Our goal with this approach is to help clinicians translate secondary findings into meaningful recognition, treatment, and prevention of disease.
Collapse
|
5
|
Mackay ZP, Dukhovny D, Phillips KA, Beggs AH, Green RC, Parad RB, Christensen KD. Quantifying Downstream Healthcare Utilization in Studies of Genomic Testing. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 23:559-565. [PMID: 32389220 PMCID: PMC7293136 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2019] [Revised: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 01/26/2020] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The challenges of understanding how interventions influence follow-up medical care are magnified during genomic testing because few patients have received it to date and because the scope of information it provides is complex and often unexpected. We tested a novel strategy for quantifying downstream healthcare utilization after genomic testing to more comprehensively and efficiently identify related services. We also evaluated the effectiveness of different methods for collecting these data. METHODS We developed a risk-based approach for a trial of newborn genomic sequencing in which we defined primary conditions based on existing diagnoses and family histories of disease and defined secondary conditions based on unexpected findings. We then created patient-specific lists of services associated with managing primary and secondary conditions. Services were quantified based on medical record reviews, surveys, and telephone check-ins with parents. RESULTS By focusing on services that genomic testing would most likely influence in the short-term, we reduced the number of services in our analyses by more than 90% compared with analyses of all observed services. We also identified the same services that were ordered in response to unexpected findings as were identified during expert review and by confirming whether recommendations were completed. Data also showed that quantifying healthcare utilization with surveys and telephone check-ins alone would have missed the majority of attributable services. CONCLUSIONS Our risk-based strategy provides an improved approach for assessing the short-term impact of genomic testing and other interventions on healthcare utilization while conforming as much as possible to existing best-practice recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoë P Mackay
- Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Dmitry Dukhovny
- Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Kathryn A Phillips
- Center for Translational and Policy Research on Personalized Medicine, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Philip R Lee Institute for Health Policy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Alan H Beggs
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Manton Center for Orphan Disease Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Robert C Green
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Partners Healthcare Personalized Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Richard B Parad
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA; Precision Medicine Translational Research Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Returning Results in the Genomic Era: Initial Experiences of the eMERGE Network. J Pers Med 2020; 10:jpm10020030. [PMID: 32349224 PMCID: PMC7354592 DOI: 10.3390/jpm10020030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2020] [Revised: 04/20/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
A goal of the 3rd phase of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE3) Network was to examine the return of results (RoR) of actionable variants in more than 100 genes to consenting participants and their healthcare providers. Each of the 10 eMERGE sites developed plans for three essential elements of the RoR process: Disclosure to the participant, notification of the health care provider, and integration of results into the electronic health record (EHR). Procedures and protocols around these three elements were adapted as appropriate to individual site requirements and limitations. Detailed information about the RoR procedures at each site was obtained through structured telephone interviews and follow-up surveys with the clinical investigator leading or participating in the RoR process at each eMERGE3 institution. Because RoR processes at each of the 10 sites allowed for taking into account differences in population, disease focus and institutional requirements, significant heterogeneity of process was identified, including variability in the order in which patients and clinicians were notified and results were placed in the EHR. This heterogeneity in the process flow for eMERGE3 RoR reflects the “real world” of genomic medicine in which RoR procedures must be shaped by the needs of the patients and institutional environments.
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
With rapid advances in genetics and genomics, the commercialization and access to new applications has become more widespread and omnipresent throughout biomedical research. Thus, increasingly, more patients will have personal genomic information they may share with primary care providers (PCPs) to better understand the clinical significance of the data. To be able to respond to patient inquiries about genomic data, variant interpretation, disease risk, and other issues, PCPs will need to be able to increase or refresh their awareness about genetics and genomics, and identify reliable resources to use or refer patients. While provider educational efforts have increased, with the rapid advances in the field, ongoing efforts will be needed to prepare PCPs to manage patient needs, integrate results into care, and refer as indicated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susanne B Haga
- Center for Applied Genomics and Precision Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, 27708, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Szego MJ, Meyn MS, Shuman C, Zlotnik Shaul R, Anderson JA, Bowdin S, Monfared N, Hayeems RZ. Views from the clinic: Healthcare provider perspectives on whole genome sequencing in paediatrics. Eur J Med Genet 2018; 62:350-356. [PMID: 30503855 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.11.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2018] [Revised: 11/22/2018] [Accepted: 11/28/2018] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is a transformative technology which promises improved diagnostic rates compared to conventional genetic testing strategies and tailored approaches to patient care. Due to the practical and ethical complexities associated with using WGS, particularly in the paediatric context, input from a broad spectrum of healthcare providers can guide implementation strategies. We recruited healthcare providers from the largest paediatric academic health science centre in Canada and conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews, exploring experiences with and perceptions of the opportunities and challenges associated with WGS. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed thematically. Interviews were completed with 14 genetics professionals (geneticists and genetic counsellors) and 15 non-genetics professionals (physician sub-specialists and nurses). Genetics professionals ordered genetic tests more often and reported greater confidence on pre- and post-test genetic counselling compared to non-genetics professionals. Most healthcare providers endorsed WGS when a more specific test was either not available or not likely to yield a diagnosis. While genetics professionals raised concerns regarding the time demands associated with reviewing WGS variants, non-genetics professionals reflected concerns about knowledge and training. Providers' position on reporting secondary variants to parents drew upon but was not limited to the concept of best interests. Taken together, understanding practical and principled matters of WGS from healthcare providers' perspectives can guide ongoing efforts to implement WGS in paediatrics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M J Szego
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada; Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Applied Genomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - M S Meyn
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Genetic Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Program in Genetics and Genomic Biology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Applied Genomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - C Shuman
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Genetic Counselling, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Genetic Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Program in Genetics and Genomic Biology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - R Zlotnik Shaul
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Bioethics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - J A Anderson
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Department of Bioethics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - S Bowdin
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Genetic Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Program in Genetics and Genomic Biology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; The Centre for Applied Genomics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - N Monfared
- Division of Clinical and Metabolic Genetics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Department of Genetic Counselling, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
| | - R Z Hayeems
- The Centre for Genetic Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and health-care costs from a multisite study. Genet Med 2018; 21:1100-1110. [PMID: 30287922 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-018-0308-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 100] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2018] [Accepted: 09/04/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Clinical sequencing emerging in health care may result in secondary findings (SFs). METHODS Seventy-four of 6240 (1.2%) participants who underwent genome or exome sequencing through the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium received one or more SFs from the original American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended 56 gene-condition pair list; we assessed clinical and psychosocial actions. RESULTS The overall adjusted prevalence of SFs in the ACMG 56 genes across the CSER consortium was 1.7%. Initially 32% of the family histories were positive, and post disclosure, this increased to 48%. The average cost of follow-up medical actions per finding up to a 1-year period was $128 (observed, range: $0-$678) and $421 (recommended, range: $141-$1114). Case reports revealed variability in the frequency of and follow-up on medical recommendations patients received associated with each SF gene-condition pair. Participants did not report adverse psychosocial impact associated with receiving SFs; this was corroborated by 18 participant (or parent) interviews. All interviewed participants shared findings with relatives and reported that relatives did not pursue additional testing or care. CONCLUSION Our results suggest that disclosure of SFs shows little to no adverse impact on participants and adds only modestly to near-term health-care costs; additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Collapse
|
10
|
Amendola LM, Berg JS, Horowitz CR, Angelo F, Bensen JT, Biesecker BB, Biesecker LG, Cooper GM, East K, Filipski K, Fullerton SM, Gelb BD, Goddard KA, Hailu B, Hart R, Hassmiller-Lich K, Joseph G, Kenny EE, Koenig BA, Knight S, Kwok PY, Lewis KL, McGuire AL, Norton ME, Ou J, Parsons DW, Powell BC, Risch N, Robinson M, Rini C, Scollon S, Slavotinek AM, Veenstra DL, Wasserstein MP, Wilfond BS, Hindorff LA, Plon SE, Jarvik GP, Jarvik GP. The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium: Integrating Genomic Sequencing in Diverse and Medically Underserved Populations. Am J Hum Genet 2018; 103:319-327. [PMID: 30193136 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 113] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2018] [Accepted: 08/15/2018] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, now in its second funding cycle, is investigating the effectiveness of integrating genomic (exome or genome) sequencing into the clinical care of diverse and medically underserved individuals in a variety of healthcare settings and disease states. The consortium comprises a coordinating center, six funded extramural clinical projects, and an ongoing National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project. Collectively, these projects aim to enroll and sequence over 6,100 participants in four years. At least 60% of participants will be of non-European ancestry or from underserved settings, with the goal of diversifying the populations that are providing an evidence base for genomic medicine. Five of the six clinical projects are enrolling pediatric patients with various phenotypes. One of these five projects is also enrolling couples whose fetus has a structural anomaly, and the sixth project is enrolling adults at risk for hereditary cancer. The ongoing NHGRI intramural project has enrolled primarily healthy adults. Goals of the consortium include assessing the clinical utility of genomic sequencing, exploring medical follow up and cascade testing of relatives, and evaluating patient-provider-laboratory level interactions that influence the use of this technology. The findings from the CSER consortium will offer patients, healthcare systems, and policymakers a clearer understanding of the opportunities and challenges of providing genomic medicine in diverse populations and settings, and contribute evidence toward developing best practices for the delivery of clinically useful and cost-effective genomic sequencing in diverse healthcare settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Gail P Jarvik
- Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA; Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
| |
Collapse
|