Compare and contrast: A cross-national study across UK, USA and Greek experts regarding return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing

European Journal of Human Genetics

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 344-349

  Gourna, Elli G ^a   Armstrong, Natalie ^a   Wallace, Susan E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC PRIVACY; GREECE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INCIDENTAL FINDING; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL EXPERT; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELATIVE; STIGMA; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; WHOLE EXOME SEQUENCING; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DNA SEQUENCE; EXOME; EXPERT WITNESS; GENETICS; PROCEDURES;

EXOME; EXPERT TESTIMONY; GREECE; HUMANS; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; INFORMED CONSENT; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84958108088     PISSN: 10184813     EISSN: 14765438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.132     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW., et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med 2013; 15: 565-574
2. Wolf SM, Paradise J, Caga-Anan C: The law of incidental findings in human subjects research: establishing researchers' duties. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 361-383, 214
3. Wolf SM, Lawrenz Frances P, Nelson CA., et al. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: Analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 219-248
4. Wolf SM. Introduction: the challenge of incidental findings. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 216-218
5. Yang Y, Muzny D, Xia F., et al. Clinical exome sequencing: results from 2000 cases (Abstract #202). Presented at the 2014 ACMG Annual Clinical Genetics Meeting, March 2014. Nashville, TN, USA
6. YangY, MuznyDM, ReidJGet al. Clinical whole-exome sequencing for the diagnosis of mendelian disorders. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1502-1511
7. ACMG ACMG Updates Recommendation on ?Opt Out? for Genome Sequencing Return of Results. 2014. [Last Accessed 16/06/2014]; Available from https://www.acmg.net/docs/Release-ACMGUpdatesRecommendations-final.pdf
8. Christenhusz GM, Devriendt K, Dierickx K: Secondary variants - in defense of a more fitting term in the incidental findings debate. Eur J Hum Genet 2013; 21: 1331-1334
9. Burke W, Matheny Antommaria AH, Bennett R., et al. Recommendations for returning genomic incidental findings?. We need to talk! Genet Med 2013; 15: 854-859
10. Shkedi-Rafid S, Dheensa S, Crawford G, Fenwick A, Lucassen A: Defining and managing incidental findings in genetic and genomic practice. J Med Genet 2014; 51: 715-723
11. van El CG, Cornel MC, Borry P., et al. Whole-genome sequencing in health care. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur J Hum Genet 2013; 21: S1-S5
12. van El CG, Dondorp WJ, De Wert G MWR, Cornel MC. Call for prudence in wholegenome testing. Science 2013; 341: 958-959
13. BioethicsGov Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues: ANTICIPATE and COMMUNICATE Ethical Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings in the Clinical, Research, and Direct-to-Consumer Contexts. Washington, DC. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. 2013
14. AGNC Association of Genetic Nurses and Counsellors. 2014. [Last Accessed 11/06/2014]; Available from http://www.agnc.org.uk/.
15. Hall A, Hallowell N, Zimmern R: Managing Incidental and Pertinent Findings from WGS in the 100, 000 Genomes Project. Cambridge: PHG Foundation. 2013
16. Green RC, Berg JS, Berry GT., et al. Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing. Genet Med 2012; 14: 405-410
17. Jarvik GP, Amendola LM, Berg JS., et al. Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. Am J Hum Genet 2014; 94: 818-826
18. Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 2418-2425
19. Clayton EW, McCullough LB, Biesecker LG., et al. Addressing the ethical challenges in genetic testing and sequencing of children. Am J Bioeth 2014; 14: 3-9
20. Gourna EG, Armstrong N, Wallace SE. Incidental findings from clinical sequencing in Greece: reporting experts' attitudes. J Commun Genet 2014; 5: 383-393
21. Pidgeon N, Henwood K: Grounded theory; Hardy M, Bryman A: Handbook of Data Analysis. SAGE: London, 2004
22. Bryman A: Social Research Methods. 4th edn Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2012
23. Lemke AA, Bick D, Dimmock D, Simpson P, Veith R: Perspectives of clinical genetics professionals toward genome sequencing and incidental findings: a survey study. Clin Genet 2013; 84: 230-236
24. Biesecker BB, Peay HL. Genomic sequencing for psychiatric disorders: promise and challenge. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2013; 1-6
25. Biesecker LG. Opportunities and challenges for the integration of massively parallel genomic sequencing into clinical practice: lessons from the ClinSeq project. Genet Med 2012; 14: 393-398
26. Berg JS, Khoury MJ, Evans JP. Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genet Med 2011; 13: 499-504
27. Downing NR, Williams JK, Daack-Hirsch S, Driessnack M, Simon CM. Genetics specialists' perspectives on disclosure of genomic incidental findings in the clinical setting. Patient Educ Couns 2013; 90: 133-138
28. Townsend A, Adam S, Birch PH, Lohn Z, Rousseau F, Friedman JM: ?I want to know what's in Pandora's Box?: comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing. Am J Med Genet A 2012; 158A: 2519-2525
29. Storm C, Agarwal R, Offit K: Ethical and legal implications of cancer genetic testing: do physicians have a duty to warn patients' relatives about possible genetic risks?. J Oncol Pract 2008; 4: 229-230
30. Clarke A, Richards M, Kerzin-Storrar L., et al. Genetic professionals' reports of nondisclosure of genetic risk information within families. Eur J Hum Genet 2005; 13: 556-562
31. Wilson BJ, Forrest K, van Teijlingen ER., et al. Family communication about genetic risk: the little that is known. CommunGenet 2004; 7: 15-24
32. Brandt DS, Shinkunas L, Hillis SL., et al. A closer look at the recommended criteria for disclosing genetic results: Perspectives of medical genetic specialists, genomic researchers, and institutional review board chairs. J Genet Couns 2013; 22: 544-553
33. Krier JB, Green RC. Management of incidental findings in clinical genomic sequencing. Curr Protoc Hum Genet 2013; Chapter 9: Unit 9.23
34. AGNC Association of Genetic Nurses and Counsellors - Code of Ethics. Association of Genetic Nurses and Counsellors: UK, 2014
35. Christenhusz GM, Devriendt K, Dierickx K: To tell or not to tell?. A systematic review of ethical reflections on incidental findings arising in genetics contexts. Eur J Hum Genet 2013; 21: 248-255
36. Korf BR, Berry AB, Limson M., et al. Framework for development of physician competencies in genomic medicine: report of the Competencies Working Group of the Inter-Society Coordinating Committee for Physician Education in Genomics. Genet Med 2014; 16: 804-809
37. Burton H, Cole T, Lucassen AM. Genomic medicine: challenges and opportunities for physicians. Clin Med 2012; 12: 416-419
38. Wynn J, Martinez J, Duong J., et al. Association of researcher characteristics with views on return of incidental findings from genomic research. J Genet Couns 2015; e-pub ahead of print 17 January 2015
39. Wolf SM, Annas GJ, Elias S: Point-counterpoint. Patient autonomy and incidental findings in clinical genomics. Science 2013; 340: 1049-1050
40. McGuire AL, Joffe S, Koenig BA., et al. Point-counterpoint. Ethics and genomic incidental findings. Science 2013; 340: 1047-1048
41. Machini K, Douglas J, Braxton A, Tsipis J, Kramer K: Genetic Counselors' views and experiences with the clinical integration of genome sequencing. J Genet Couns 2014; 23: 496-505
42. Ormond KE, Cho MK. Translating personalized medicine using new genetic technologies in clinical practice: the ethical issues. Pers Med 2014; 11: 211-222
43. Kocarnik JM, Fullerton SM. Returning pleiotropic results from genetic testing to patients and research participants. JAMA 2014; 311: 795-796
44. Jamal Seema M, Joon-Ho Yu, Chong Jessica X., et al. Practices and policies of clinical exome sequencing providers: analysis and implications. Am J Med Genet A 2013; 161: 935-950
45. Netzer C, Klein C, Kohlhase J, Kubisch C: New challenges for informed consent through whole genome array testing. J Med Genet 2009; 46: 495-496
46. Rigter T, Henneman L, Kristoffersson U., et al. Reflecting on earlier experiences with unsolicited findings: points to consider for next-generation sequencing and informed consent in diagnostics. Hum Mutat 2013; 34: 1322-1328
47. Lohn Z, Adam S, Birch PH, Friedman JM. Incidental findings from clinical genomewide sequencing: a review. J Genet Couns 2013; 23: 463-473
48. Ross LF, Rothstein MA, Clayton EW. Mandatory extended searches in all genome sequencing: ?incidental findings, ? patient autonomy, and shared decision making. JAMA 2013; 310: 367-368
49. Klitzman R, Appelbaum PS, Chung W: Return of secondary genomic findings vs patient autonomy: implications for medical care. JAMA 2013; 310: 369-370