1
|
Vassy JL, Brunette CA, Yi T, Harrison A, Cardellino MP, Assimes TL, Christensen KD, Devineni P, Gaziano JM, Gong X, Hui Q, Knowles JW, Muralidhar S, Natarajan P, Pyarajan S, Sears MG, Shi Y, Sturm AC, Whitbourne SB, Sun YV, Danowski ME. Design and Pilot Results from Million Veteran Program Return Of Actionable Genetic Results (MVP-ROAR) Study. Am Heart J 2024:S0002-8703(24)00115-7. [PMID: 38762090 DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2024.04.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2024] [Revised: 04/30/2024] [Accepted: 04/30/2024] [Indexed: 05/20/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As a mega-biobank linked to a national healthcare system, the Million Veteran Program (MVP) can directly improve the health care of participants. To determine the feasibility and outcomes of returning medically actionable genetic results to MVP participants, the program launched the MVP Return Of Actionable Results (MVP-ROAR) Study, with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) as an exemplar actionable condition. METHODS The MVP-ROAR Study consists of a completed single-arm pilot phase and an ongoing randomized clinical trial (RCT), in which MVP participants are recontacted and invited to receive clinical confirmatory gene sequencing testing and a telegenetic counseling intervention. The primary outcome of the RCT is 6-month change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) between participants receiving results at baseline and those receiving results after 6 months. RESULTS The pilot developed processes to identify and recontact participants nationally with probable pathogenic variants in low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) on the MVP genotype array, invite them to clinical confirmatory gene sequencing, and deliver a telegenetic counseling intervention. Among participants in the pilot phase, 8 (100%) had active statin prescriptions after 6 months. Results were shared with 16 first-degree family members. Six-month ΔLDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) after the genetic counseling intervention was -37 mg/dL (95% CI: -12 to -61; p=0.03). The ongoing RCT will determine between-arm differences in this primary outcome. CONCLUSION While underscoring the importance of clinical confirmation of research results, the pilot phase of the MVP-ROAR Study marks a turning point in MVP and demonstrates the feasibility of returning genetic results to participants and their providers. The ongoing RCT will contribute to understanding how such a program might improve patient health care and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason L Vassy
- VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | | | - Thomas Yi
- VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Kurt D Christensen
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; PRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute
| | | | - J Michael Gaziano
- VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Xin Gong
- VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Qin Hui
- Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA; VA Atlanta Healthcare System, Decatur, GA
| | | | - Sumitra Muralidhar
- Veterans Health Administration, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
| | - Pradeep Natarajan
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA
| | | | | | - Yunling Shi
- VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | - Yan V Sun
- Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA; VA Atlanta Healthcare System, Decatur, GA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Iltis AS, Rolf L, Yaeger L, Goodman MS, DuBois JM. Attitudes and beliefs regarding race-targeted genetic testing of Black people: A systematic review. J Genet Couns 2023; 32:435-461. [PMID: 36644818 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1653] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2022] [Revised: 10/25/2022] [Accepted: 10/28/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
Geographical ancestry has been associated with an increased risk of various genetic conditions. Race and ethnicity often have been used as proxies for geographical ancestry. Despite numerous problems associated with the crude reliance on race and ethnicity as proxies for geographical ancestry, some genetic testing in the clinical, research, and employment settings has been and continues to be race- or ethnicity-based. Race-based or race-targeted genetic testing refers to genetic testing offered only or primarily to people of particular racial or ethnic groups because of presumed differences among groups. One current example is APOL1 testing of Black kidney donors. Race-based genetic testing raises numerous ethical and policy questions. Given the ongoing reliance on the Black race in genetic testing, it is important to understand the views of people who identify as Black or are identified as Black (including African American, Afro-Caribbean, and Hispanic Black) regarding race-based genetic testing that targets Black people because of their race. We conducted a systematic review of studies and reports of stakeholder-engaged projects that examined how people who identify as or are identified as Black perceive genetic testing that specifically presumes genetic differences exist among racial groups or uses race as a surrogate for ancestral genetic variation and targets Black people. Our review identified 14 studies that explicitly studied this question and another 13 that implicitly or tacitly studied this matter. We found four main factors that contribute to a positive attitude toward race-targeted genetic testing (facilitators) and eight main factors that are associated with concerns regarding race-targeted genetic testing (barriers). This review fills an important gap. These findings should inform future genetic research and the policies and practices developed in clinical, research, public health, or other settings regarding genetic testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Liz Rolf
- Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine
| | - Lauren Yaeger
- Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Johnson LM, Mandrell BN, Li C, Lu Z, Gattuso J, Harrison LW, Mori M, Ouma AA, Pritchard M, Sharp KMH, Nichols KE. Managing Pandora's Box: Familial Expectations around the Return of (Future) Germline Results. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2022; 13:152-165. [PMID: 35471132 DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2022.2063994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pediatric oncology patients are increasingly being offered germline testing to diagnose underlying cancer predispositions. Meanwhile, as understanding of variant pathogenicity evolves, planned reanalysis of genomic results has been suggested. Little is known regarding the types of genomic information that parents and their adolescent children with cancer prefer to receive at the time of testing or their expectations around the future return of genomic results. METHODS Parents and adolescent children with cancer eligible for genomic testing for cancer predisposition were surveyed regarding their attitudes and expectations for receiving current and future germline results (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02530658). RESULTS All parents (100%) desired to learn about results for treatable or preventable conditions, with 92.4% wanting results even when there is no treatment or prevention. Parents expressed less interest in receiving uncertain results for themselves (88.3%) than for their children (95.3%). Most parents (95.9%) and adolescents (87.9%) believed that providers have a responsibility to share new or updated germline results indefinitely or at any point during follow-up care. Fewer parents (67.5%) indicated that they would want results if their child was deceased: 10.3% would not want to be contacted, 19.3% were uncertain. CONCLUSIONS Expectations for return of new or updated genomic results are high among pediatric oncology families, although up to one third of parents have reservations about receiving such information in the event of their child's death. These results underscore the importance of high-quality pre-and post-test counseling, conducted by individuals trained in consenting around genomic testing to elicit family preferences and align expectations around the return of germline results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liza-Marie Johnson
- Department of Oncology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Belinda N Mandrell
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nursing Research, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Chen Li
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Zhaohua Lu
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Jami Gattuso
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nursing Research, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Lynn W Harrison
- Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Predisposition, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Motomi Mori
- Department of Biostatistics, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Annastasia A Ouma
- Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Predisposition, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Michele Pritchard
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nursing Research, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | | | - Kim E Nichols
- Department of Oncology, Division of Cancer Predisposition, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| |
Collapse
|