Participant use and communication of findings from exome sequencing: A mixed-methods study

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 577-583

  Lewis, Katie L ^a   Hooker, Gillian W ^a,b   Connors, Philip D ^a,c   Hyams, Travis C ^a,d   Wright, Martha F ^a,e   Caldwell, Samantha ^a,f   Biesecker, Leslie G ^a   Biesecker, Barbara B ^a  

^a NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b NextGxDx   (United States)

^c BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^e VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

experiences; genome; outcomes; sequencing; utility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISTRESS SUBSCALE; EXOME; FAMILY; FEMALE; GENE SEQUENCE; GENOME; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; MULTIDIMENSIONAL IMPACT OF CANCER RISK ASSESSMENT; POSITIVE EXPERIENCES SUBSCALE; DNA SEQUENCE; GENETICS; HUMAN GENOME; MIDDLE AGED; NORMAL HUMAN; PSYCHOLOGY; WHOLE EXOME SEQUENCING;

ADULT; COMMUNICATION; DISCLOSURE; FAMILY; FEMALE; GENOME, HUMAN; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HEALTHY VOLUNTEERS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; WHOLE EXOME SEQUENCING;

EID: 84975089400     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.133     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Shalowitz DI, Miller FG. Disclosing individual results of clinical research: implications of respect for participants. JAMA 2005; 294: 737-740
2. Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, et al. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 219-48, 211
3. Clayton EW, Ross LF. Implications of disclosing individual results of clinical research. JAMA 2006; 295: 37; author reply 37-38
4. Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR, et al. Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute working group. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 2010; 3: 574-580
5. Henderson GE, Wolf SM, Kuczynski KJ, et al. The challenge of informed consent and return of results in translational genomics: empirical analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 2014; 42: 344-355
6. Wright MF, Lewis KL, Fisher TC, et al. Preferences for results delivery from exome sequencing/genome sequencing. Genet Med 2014; 16: 442-447
7. Bloss CS, Schork NJ, Topol EJ. Effect of direct-To-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 524-534
8. Sie AS, Prins JB, van Zelst-Stams WA, Veltman JA, Feenstra I, Hoogerbrugge N. Patient experiences with gene panels based on exome sequencing in clinical diagnostics: high acceptance and low distress. Clin Genet 2015; 87: 319-326
9. Collins FS. Exceptional opportunities in medical science: a view from the National Institutes of Health. JAMA 2015; 313: 131-132
10. Foster MW, Mulvihill JJ, Sharp RR. Evaluating the utility of personal genomic information. Genet Med 2009; 11: 570-574
11. Bunnik EM, Janssens AC, Schermer MH. Personal utility in genomic testing: is there such a thing? J Med Ethics 2015; 41: 322-326
12. Facio FM, Brooks S, Loewenstein J, Green S, Biesecker LG, Biesecker BB. Motivators for participation in a whole-genome sequencing study: implications for translational genomics research. Eur J Hum Genet 2011; 19: 1213-1217
13. Bollinger JM, Scott J, Dvoskin R, Kaufman D. Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genet Med 2012; 14: 451-457
14. Kohane IS, Taylor PL. Multidimensional results reporting to participants in genomic studies: getting it right. Sci Transl Med 2010; 2: 37cm19
15. Biesecker LG, Mullikin JC, Facio FM, et al.; NISC Comparative Sequencing Program. The ClinSeq Project: piloting large-scale genome sequencing for research in genomic medicine. Genome Res 2009; 19: 1665-1674
16. Ng D, Johnston JJ, Teer JK, et al.; NIH Intramural Sequencing Center (NISC) Comparative Sequencing Program. Interpreting secondary cardiac disease variants in an exome cohort. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 2013; 6: 337-346
17. Cella D, Hughes C, Peterman A, et al. A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. Health Psychol 2002; 21: 564-572
18. Lewis KL, Han PK, Hooker GW, Klein WM, Biesecker LG, Biesecker BB. Characterizing Participants in the ClinSeq Genome Sequencing Cohort as Early Adopters of a New Health Technology. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0132690
19. Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, et al.; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med 2013; 15: 565-574
20. Kinney AY, Simonsen SE, Baty BJ, Mandal D, Neuhausen SL, Seggar K, et al. Risk reduction behaviors and provider communication following genetic counseling and BRCA1 mutation testing in an African American kindred. J Genet Couns 2006; 15: 293-305
21. Botkin JR, Smith KR, Croyle RT, et al. Genetic testing for a BRCA1 mutation: prophylactic surgery and screening behavior in women 2 years post testing. Am J Med Genet A 2003; 118A: 201-209
22. The National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Screening Consortium. Screening mammography: a missed clinical opportunity? Results of the NCI breast cancer screening consortium and National Health Interview Survey Studies. JAMA 1990; 264: 54-58
23. Johnston JJ, Rubinstein WS, Facio FM, et al. Secondary variants in individuals undergoing exome sequencing: screening of 572 individuals identifies highpenetrance mutations in cancer-susceptibility genes. Am J Hum Genet 2012; 91: 97-108
24. Forrest K, Simpson SA, Wilson BJ, et al. To tell or not to tell: barriers and facilitators in family communication about genetic risk. Clin Genet 2003; 64: 317-326
25. Henderson G, Garrett J, Bussey-Jones J, Moloney ME, Blumenthal C, Corbie-Smith G. Great expectations: views of genetic research participants regarding current and future genetic studies. Genet Med 2008; 10: 193-200
26. Manolio TA, Chisholm RL, Ozenberger B, et al. Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here. Genet Med 2013; 15: 258-267
27. Yu JH, Harrell TM, Jamal SM, Tabor HK, Bamshad MJ. Attitudes of genetics professionals toward the return of incidental results from exome and wholegenome sequencing. Am J Hum Genet 2014; 95: 77-84
28. Sanderson SC, Linderman MD, Kasarskis A, et al. Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: a longitudinal cohort study. Genome Med 2013; 5: 113
29. Roberts JS, Christensen KD, Green RC. Using Alzheimer's disease as a model for genetic risk disclosure: implications for personal genomics. Clin Genet 2011; 80: 407-414
30. Heshka JT, Palleschi C, Howley H, Wilson B, Wells PS. A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing. Genet Med 2008; 10: 19-32