Sequencing for a Lifetime: Value, Feasibility, and the Governance Gap in Lifelong Genomic Medicine
Lewis, A. C. F.; Holm, I. A.; Buchanan, A. H.; Goldenberg, A. J.; Knoppers, B. M.; McGuire, A. L.; Green, R. C.
Show abstract
BackgroundA vision of lifelong genomic medicine, in which stored genomic data can inform a lifetime of care has long animated the field of genomic medicine. Component pieces of this vision are being researched or are already in clinical practice, including dozens of projects around the world sequencing healthy newborns, along with reanalysis of stored genomic data. Whether lifelong genomic medicine is desirable, and, if so, whether it is feasible, has not been explored in the literature. Methods and FindingsWe conducted and thematically analyzed interviews with over 50 US-based healthcare professionals, including clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, primary care clinicians, laboratory personnel, and those who have implemented genomic screening in health systems. We found broad endorsement of the value of lifelong genomic medicine across groups. Perceived clinical value stemmed from the existence of genomic information relevant at multiple stages of life, the ability to query the genome if an individuals medical circumstances change, and the ability to inform patients about relevant evolving scientific advances. Participants also articulated an efficiency argument for reanalyzing stored genomic data rather than retesting. The clinical value was contested by a few participants, who argued for more targeted testing for the clinical situation and disputed the efficiency argument. Many participants viewed the model as inevitable, with operational precedent already established for many component activities. The feasibility of lifelong genomic medicine was limited not by scientific barriers but by governance gaps spanning delivery models, consent, data stewardship, recontact, and the pediatric-to-adult transition. These gaps have equity implications that are cumulative and mutually reinforcing. ConclusionsThe concept of lifelong genomic medicine was widely viewed as acceptable and desired. However, until the governance infrastructure is established, including accountability, funding, data stewardship, and recontact mechanisms, population-scale genomic sequencing risks proceeding faster than the frameworks needed to make it responsible.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and evaluation of a novel educational program for providers on the use of polygenic risk scores 94%
- Using Coincidence Analysis to Identify Causal Chains of Factors Associated with Implementation and Optimization of Lynch Syndrome Tumor Screening Across Multiple Health care Systems 93%
- ClinGen Variant Curation Interface Workshops: Training Variant Scientists on an International Platform 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Pooled Electronic Consultation Program to Improve Access to Genetics Specialists 92%
- Evaluation of DNA-poli: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial to assess a digital platform for family cascade genetic testing and predictive genetic counselling 90%
- A clinical algorithm to identify people with the glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase p.Val68Met variant at risk for diabetes undertreatment 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- Defining the Critical Educational Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing: Views of US-Based Genetic Counselors and Medical Geneticists 94%
- A Qualitative Study Exploring the Consumer Experience of Receiving Self-Initiated Polygenic Risk Scores from a Third-Party Website 93%
- Benefits and barriers to implementing precision preventive care: results of a national physician survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.