Incidental findings from clinical genome-wide sequencing: A review

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 463-473

  Lohn, Z ^a,b   Adam, S ^a   Birch, P H ^a   Friedman, J M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b CHILDREN S AND WOMEN S HEALTH CENTRE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clinical genetics; Genetic counseling; Genomic medicine; Incidental finding; Personalized medicine; Return of results; Secondary finding; Sequencing; Whole exome sequencing; Whole genome sequencing

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; INCIDENTAL FINDING; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

GENOME, HUMAN; HUMANS; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS;

EID: 84904252658     PISSN: 10597700     EISSN: 15733599     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10897-013-9604-4     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Ali-Khan, S. E.; Daar, A. S.; Shuman, C.; Ray, P. N.; Scherer, S. W. (2009). Whole genome scanning: resolving clinical diagnosis and management amidst complex data. Pediatric Research, 66, 357-363.
2. Ashley, E. A.; Butte, A. J.; Wheeler, M. T.; Chen, R.; Klein, T. E.; Dewey, F. E.; et al. (2010). Clinical assessment incorporating a personal genome. Lancet, 375, 1525-1535.
3. Avard, D.; Senecal, K.; Madadi, P.; Sinnett, D. (2011). Pediatric research and the return of individual research results. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 39, 593-604.
4. Ayuso, C.; Millan, J.M.; Mancheno, M.; Dal-Re, R. (2013). Informed consent for whole-genome sequencing studies in the clinical setting. proposed recommendations on essential content and process. European Journal of Human Genetics [Epub ahead of print].
5. Bamshad, M. J.; Ng, S. B.; Bigham, A. W.; Tabor, H. K.; Emond, M. J.; Nickerson, D. A.; et al. (2011). Exome sequencing as a tool for mendelian disease gene discovery. Nature Reviews Genetics, 12, 745-755.
6. Berg, J. S.; Khoury, M. J.; Evans, J. P. (2011). Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 499-504.
7. Berg, J. S.; Adams, M.; Nassar, N.; Bizon, C.; Lee, K.; Schmitt, C. P.; et al. (2012). An informatics approach to analyzing the incidentalome. Genetics in Medicine, 15, 36-44.
8. Bevan, J. L.; Senn-Reeves, J. N.; Inventor, B. R.; Greiner, S. M.; Mayer, K. M.; Rivard, M. T.; et al. (2012). Critical social theory approach to disclosure of genomic incidental findings. Nursing Ethics, 19, 819-828.
9. Bloss, C. S.; Ornowski, L.; Silver, E.; Cargill, M.; Vanier, V.; Schork, N. J.; et al. (2010). Consumer perceptions of direct-to-consumer personalized genomic risk assessments. Genetics in Medicine, 12, 556-566.
10. Bollinger, J. M.; Scott, J.; Dvoskin, R.; Kaufman, D. (2012). Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 451-457.
11. Bookman, E. B.; Langehorne, A. A.; Eckfeldt, J. H.; Glass, K. C.; Jarvik, G. P.; Klag, M.; NHLBI Working Group, et al. (2006). Reporting genetic results in research studies: summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 140, 1033-1040.
12. Borry, P.; Stultiens, L.; Nys, H.; Cassiman, J. J.; Dierickx, K. (2006). Presymptomatic and predictive genetic testing in minors: a systematic review of guidelines and position papers. Clinical Genetics, 70, 374-381.
13. Bradbury, A. R.; Patrick-Miller, L.; Pawlowski, K.; Ibe, C. N.; Cummings, S. A.; Olopade, O. I.; et al. (2008). Should genetic testing for BRCA1/2 be permitted for minors? opinions of BRCA mutation carriers and their adult offspring. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 148C, 70-77.
14. Bredenoord, A. L.; Kroes, H. Y.; Cuppen, E.; Parker, M.; van Delden, J. J. (2011). Disclosure of individual genetic data to research participants: the debate reconsidered. Trends in Genetics, 27, 41-47.
15. Catz, D. S.; Green, N. S.; Tobin, J. N.; Lloyd-Puryear, M. A.; Kyler, P.; Umemoto, A.; et al. (2005). Attitudes about genetics in underserved, culturally diverse populations. Community Genetics, 8, 161-172.
16. Caulfield, T.; McGuire, A. L.; Cho, M.; Buchanan, J. A.; Burgess, M. M.; Danilczyk, U.; et al. (2008). Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement. PLoS Biology, 6, e73.
17. Cho, M. K. (2008). Understanding incidental findings in the context of genetics and genomics. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 280-285.
18. Christenhusz, G. M.; Devriendt, K.; Dierickx, K. (2013). To tell or not to tell? A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 248-55.
19. Clayton, E. W. (2008). Incidental findings in genetics research using archived DNA. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 286-291.
20. Davis, D. S. (1997). Genetic dilemmas and the child's right to an open future. The Hastings Center Report, 27, 7-15.
21. Dimmock, D. (2012). A personal perspective on returning secondary results of clinical genome sequencing. Genome Medicine, 4, 54.
22. Downing, N. R.; Williams, J. K.; Daack-Hirsch, S.; Driessnack, M.; Simon, C. M. (2013). Genetics specialists' perspectives on disclosure of genomic incidental findings in the clinical setting. Patient Education and Counseling, 90, 133-138.
23. Drmanac, R. (2011). The advent of personal genome sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 188-190.
24. Evans, J. P.; Rothschild, B. B. (2012). Return of results: not that complicated? Genetics in Medicine, 14, 358-360.
25. Facio, F. M.; Brooks, S.; Loewenstein, J.; Green, S.; Biesecker, L. G.; Biesecker, B. B. (2011). Motivators for participation in a whole-genome sequencing study: Implications for translational genomics research. European Journal of Human Genetics, 19, 1213-1217.
26. Fernandez CV, Strahlendorf C, Avard D, Knoppers BM, O'Connell C, Bouffet E et al. 2013. Attitudes of canadian researchers toward the return to participants of incidental and targeted genomic findings obtained in a pediatric research setting. Medical Genetics [Epub ahead of print].
27. Foster, M. W.; Mulvihill, J. J.; Sharp, R. R. (2009). Evaluating the utility of personal genomic information. Genetics in Medicine, 11, 570-574.
28. Goldsmith, L.; Jackson, L.; O'Connor, A.; Skirton, H. (2012). Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: Systematic review of the literature on user perspectives. European Journal of Human Genetics, 20, 811-816.
29. Gonzaga-Jauregui, C.; Lupski, J. R.; Gibbs, R. A. (2012). Human genome sequencing in health and disease. Annual Review of Medicine, 63, 35-61.
30. Green, M. J.; Peterson, S. K.; Baker, M. W.; Harper, G. R.; Friedman, L. C.; Rubinstein, W. S.; et al. (2004). Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 292, 442-452.
31. Green, M. J.; Peterson, S. K.; Baker, M. W.; Friedman, L. C.; Harper, G. R.; Rubinstein, W. S.; et al. (2005). Use of an educational computer program before genetic counseling for breast cancer susceptibility: Effects on duration and content of counseling sessions. Genetics in Medicine, 7, 221-229.
32. Green, R. C.; Berg, J. S.; Berry, G. T.; Biesecker, L. G.; Dimmock, D. P.; Evans, J. P.; et al. (2012). Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 405-410.
33. Green, R.C.; Berg, J.S.; Grody, W.W.; Kalia, S.S.; Korf, B.R.; et al. (2013). The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) Recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing March 21 2013 (1-29). www.acmg.net/docs/ACMG-Releases- HighlyAnticipated-Recommendations-on-Incidental-Findings-in-Clinical-Exome-and- Genome-Sequencing.pdf. Accessed 21 March 2013.
34. Grosse, S. D.; McBride, C. M.; Evans, J. P.; Khoury, M. J. (2009). Personal utility and genomic information: look before you leap. Genetics in Medicine, 11, 575-576.
35. Haga, S. B.; O'daniel, J. M.; Tindall, G. M.; Lipkus, I. R.; Agans, R. (2011). Public attitudes toward ancillary information revealed by pharmacogenetic testing under limited information conditions. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 723-728.
36. Halverson, C. M.; Ross, L. F. (2012). Incidental findings of therapeutic misconception in biobank-based research. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 611-615.
37. Harris, E. D.; Ziniel, S. I.; Amatruda, J. G.; Clinton, C. M.; Savage, S. K.; Taylor, P. L.; et al. (2012). The beliefs, motivations, and expectations of parents who have enrolled their children in a genetic biorepository. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 330-337.
38. Heald, B.; Moran, R.; Milas, M.; Burke, C.; Eng, C. (2007). Familial adenomatous polyposis in a patient with unexplained mental retardation. Nature Clinical Practice Neurology, 3, 694-700.
39. Henderson, G. E. (2011). Is informed consent broken? The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 42, 267-72.
40. Henneman, L.; Timmermans, D. R.; van der Wal, G. (2004). Public experiences, knowledge and expectations about medical genetics and the use of genetic information. Community Genetics, 7, 33-43.
41. Hens, K.; Nys, H.; Cassiman, J. J.; Dierickx, K. (2011). The return of individual research findings in paediatric genetic research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 37, 179-183.
42. Hens, K.; Van El, C. E.; Borry, P.; Cambon-Thomsen, A.; Cornel, M. C.; Forzano, F.; et al. (2013). Developing a policy for paediatric biobanks: principles for good practice. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21, 2-7.
43. Hogan, J.; Turner, A.; Tucker, K.; Warwick, L. (2013). Unintended diagnosis of von hippel lindau syndrome using array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH): Counseling challenges arising from unexpected information. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 22, 22-26.
44. Jackson, L.; Goldsmith, L.; O'Connor, A.; Skirton, H. (2012). Incidental findings in genetic research and clinical diagnostic tests: a systematic review. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 12, 3159-3167.
45. Johnston, J. J.; Rubinstein, W. S.; Facio, F. M.; Ng, D.; Singh, L. N.; Teer, J. K.; et al. (2012). Secondary variants in individuals undergoing exome sequencing: screening of 572 individuals identifies high-penetrance mutations in cancer-susceptibility genes. American Journal of Human Genetics, 91, 97-108.
46. Kaye, J.; Boddington, P.; de Vries, J.; Hawkins, N.; Melham, K. (2010). Ethical implications of the use of whole genome methods in medical research. European Journal of Human Genetics, 18, 398-403.
47. Knoppers, B. M.; Joly, Y.; Simard, J.; Durocher, F. (2006). The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives. European Journal of Human Genetics, 14, 1170-1178.
48. Kohane, I. S.; Taylor, P. L. (2010). Multidimensional results reporting to participants in genomic studies: getting it right. Science Translational Medicine, 2, 37-19.
49. Kohane, I. S.; Masys, D. R.; Altman, R. B. (2006). The incidentalome: a threat to genomic medicine. JAMA, 296, 212-215.
50. Kohane, I. S.; Mandl, K. D.; Taylor, P. L.; Holm, I. A.; Nigrin, D. J.; Kunkel, L. M. (2007). Medicine. reestablishing the researcher-patient compact. Science, 316, 836-837.
51. Kohane, I. S.; Hsing, M.; Kong, S. W. (2012). Taxonomizing, sizing, and overcoming the incidentalome. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 399-404.
52. Lanie, A. D.; Jayaratne, T. E.; Sheldon, J. P.; Kardia, S. L.; Anderson, E. S.; Feldbaum, M.; et al. (2004). Exploring the public understanding of basic genetic concepts. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 13, 305-320.
53. Lavieri, R. R.; Garner, S. A. (2006). Ethical considerations in the communication of unexpected information with clinical implications. The American Journal of Bioethics, 6, 46-48.
54. Lawrenz, F.; Sobotka, S. (2008). Empirical analysis of current approaches to incidental findings. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 249-255.
55. Lemke A, Bick D, Dimmock D, Simpson P, Veith R. 2012. Perspectives of clinical genetics professionals toward genome sequencing and incidental findings: a survey study. Clinical Genetics [Epub ahead of print].
56. Lewis, A.; James, P. (2012). An incidental finding of a large genomic deletion of BRCA1 on a molecular karyotype for a 5 year old child. Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice, 10(Suppl 2), A73.
57. Lohn, Z.; Adam, S.; Birch, P. H.; Townsend, A.; Friedman, J. M. (2013). Genetics professionals' perspectives on reporting incidental findings from clinical genome-wide sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 161, 542-549.
58. Lumbreras, B.; Donat, L.; Hernandez-Aguado, I. (2010). Incidental findings in imaging diagnostic tests: a systematic review. British Journal of Radiology, 83, 276-289.
59. Lyon, G. J.; Jiang, T.; Van Wijk, R.; Wang, W.; Bodily, P. M.; Xing, J.; et al. (2011). Exome sequencing and unrelated findings in the context of complex disease research: ethical and clinical implications. Discovery Medicine, 12, 41-55.
60. MacArthur, D. G.; Balasubramanian, S.; Frankish, A.; Huang, N.; Morris, J.; Walter, K.; et al. (2012). A systematic survey of loss-of-function variants in human protein-coding genes. Science, 335, 823-828.
61. Maheu, C.; Thorne, S. (2008). Receiving inconclusive genetic test results: an interpretive description of the BRCA1/2 experience. Research in Nursing & Health, 31, 553-562.
62. Matutina, R. E. (2010). The concept analysis of therapeutic misconception. Nurse Researcher, 17, 83-90.
63. Mayer, A. N.; Dimmock, D. P.; Arca, M. J.; Bick, D. P.; Verbsky, J. W.; Worthey, E. A.; et al. (2011). A timely arrival for genomic medicine. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 195-196.
64. McGuire, A. L.; Lupski, J. R. (2010). Personal genome research: what should the participant be told? Trends in Genetics, 26, 199-201.
65. McGuire, A. L.; Caulfield, T.; Cho, M. K. (2008). Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9, 152-156.
66. Meacham, M. C.; Starks, H.; Burke, W.; Edwards, K. (2010). Researcher perspectives on disclosure of incidental findings in genetic research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5, 31-41.
67. Mesters, I.; Ausems, A.; De Vries, H. (2005). General public's knowledge, interest and information needs related to genetic cancer: an exploratory study. European Journal of Cancer Prevention, 14, 69-75.
68. Meulenkamp, T. M.; Gevers, S. K.; Bovenberg, J. A.; Koppelman, G. H.; van Hylckama, V. A.; Smets, E. M. (2010). Communication of biobanks' research results: what do (potential) participants want? American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 152A, 2482-2492.
69. Michie, S.; Dormandy, E.; Marteau, T. M. (2003). Informed choice: understanding knowledge in the context of screening uptake. Patient Education and Counseling, 50, 247-253.
70. Miller, F. A.; Hayeems, R. Z.; Bombard, Y.; Little, J.; Carroll, J. C.; Wilson, B.; et al. (2009). Clinical obligations and public health programmes: healthcare provider reasoning about managing the incidental results of newborn screening. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35, 626-634.
71. Miller, F. A.; Hayeems, R. Z.; Li, L.; Bytautas, J. P. (2012). One thing leads to another: the cascade of obligations when researchers report genetic research results to study participants. European Journal of Human Genetics, 20, 837-843.
72. Molster, C.; Charles, T.; Samanek, A.; O'Leary, P. (2009). Australian study on public knowledge of human genetics and health. Public Health Genomics, 12, 84-91.
73. Murphy, J.; Scott, J.; Kaufman, D.; Geller, G.; LeRoy, L.; Hudson, K. (2008). Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research. The American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 36-43.
74. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group, Fabsitz, R. R.; McGuire, A.; Sharp, R. R.; Puggal, M.; Beskow, L. M.; Biesecker, L. G.; et al. (2010). Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a national heart, lung, and blood institute working group. Circulation. Cardiovascular Genetics, 3, 574-580.
75. Need, A. C.; Shashi, V.; Hitomi, Y.; Schoch, K.; Shianna, K. V.; McDonald, M. T.; et al. (2012). Clinical application of exome sequencing in undiagnosed genetic conditions. Journal of Medical Genetics, 49, 353-361.
76. Netzer, C.; Klein, C.; Kohlhase, J.; Kubisch, C. (2009). New challenges for informed consent through whole genome array testing. Journal of Medical Genetics, 46, 495-496.
77. O'Daniel, J.; Haga, S. B. (2011). Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results. Public Health Genomics, 14, 346-55.
78. O'Daniel, J. M.; Lee, K. (2012). Whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing in hereditary cancer: impact on genetic testing and counseling. Cancer Journal, 18, 287-292.
79. O'Neill, S. C.; DeMarco, T.; Peshkin, B. N.; Rogers, S.; Rispoli, J.; Brown, K.; et al. (2006). Tolerance for uncertainty and perceived risk among women receiving uninformative BRCA1/2 test results. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 142, 251-259.
80. Parker, L. S. (2008). The future of incidental findings: should they be viewed as benefits? The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 341-351.
81. Ravitsky, V.; Wilfond, B. S. (2006). Disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. The American Journal of Bioethics, 6, 8-17.
82. Rotimi, C. N.; Marshall, P. A. (2010). Tailoring the process of informed consent in genetic and genomic research. Genome Medicine, 2, 20.
83. Schwarzbraun, T.; Obenauf, A. C.; Langmann, A.; Gruber-Sedlmayr, U.; Wagner, K.; Speicher, M. R.; et al. (2009). Predictive diagnosis of the cancer prone li-fraumeni syndrome by accident: new challenges through whole genome array testing. Journal of Medical Genetics, 46, 341-344.
84. Semaka, A.; Balneaves, L. G.; Hayden, M. R. (2013). "Grasping the grey": patient understanding and interpretation of an intermediate allele predictive test result for huntington disease. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 22, 200-17.
85. Sharp, R. R. (2011). Downsizing genomic medicine: approaching the ethical complexity of whole-genome sequencing by starting small. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 191-194.
86. Sharp, H. M.; Orr, R. D. (2004). When "minimal risk" research yields clinically-significant data, maybe the risks aren't so minimal. The American Journal of Bioethics, 4, W32-6.
87. Simon, C. M.; Williams, J. K.; Shinkunas, L.; Brandt, D.; Daack-Hirsch, S.; Driessnack, M. (2011). Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6, 53-67.
88. Stack, C. B.; Gharani, N.; Gordon, E. S.; Schmidlen, T.; Christman, M. F.; Keller, M. A. (2011). Genetic risk estimation in the coriell personalized medicine collaborative. Genetics in Medicine, 13, 131-139.
89. Tabor, H. K.; Cho, M. K. (2007). Ethical implications of array comparative genomic hybridization in complex phenotypes: points to consider in research. Genetics in Medicine, 9, 626-631.
90. Tabor, H. K.; Stock, J.; Brazg, T.; McMillin, M. J.; Dent, K. M.; Yu, J. H.; et al. (2012). Informed consent for whole genome sequencing: a qualitative analysis of participant expectations and perceptions of risks, benefits, and harms. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 158A, 1310-1319.
91. Tarini, B. A.; Singer, D.; Clark, S. J.; Davis, M. M. (2009). Parents' interest in predictive genetic testing for their children when a disease has no treatment. Pediatrics, 124, 432-8.
92. Tennessen, J. A.; Bigham, A. W.; O'Connor, T. D.; Fu, W.; Kenny, E. E.; Gravel, S.; et al. (2012). Evolution and functional impact of rare coding variation from deep sequencing of human exomes. Science, 337, 64-9.
93. Tercyak, K. P.; Hensley Alford, S.; Emmons, K. M.; Lipkus, I. M.; Wilfond, B. S.; McBride, C. M. (2011). Parents' attitudes toward pediatric genetic testing for common disease risk. Pediatrics, 127, 1288-95.
94. Thorogood, A.; Knoppers, B.; Dondorp, W.; de Wert, G. (2012). Whole-genome sequencing and the physician. Clinical Genetics, 81, 511-513.
95. Townsend, A.; Adam, S.; Birch, P. H.; Lohn, Z.; Rousseau, F.; Friedman, J. M. (2012). "I want to know what's in pandora's box": comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 158A, 2519-2525.
96. Van Ness, B. (2008). Genomic research and incidental findings. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 292-297.
97. Wilfond, B. S.; Carpenter, K. J. (2008). Incidental findings in pediatric research. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 332-40.
98. Wolf, S. M. (2008). Introduction: the challenge of incidental findings. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 216-218.
99. Wolf, S. M.; Lawrenz, F. P.; Nelson, C. A.; Kahn, J. P.; Cho, M. K.; Clayton, E. W.; et al. (2008). Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 36, 219-48.
100. Wolf, S. M.; Crock, B. N.; Van Ness, B.; Lawrenz, F.; Kahn, J. P.; Beskow, L. M.; et al. (2012). Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genetics in Medicine, 14, 361-384.