Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts
Linderman, M. D.; Adelson, S. M.; Berro, T. M.; Anderson, J. L.; Crawford, S. D.; Cunningham, T. J.; Esplin, E. D.; Ewing-Crawford, A. T.; Nielsen, D. E.; Pereira, S.; Schmidlen, T.; Andrighetti, H.; Bleyl, S. B.; Church, G. M.; Haverfield, E. V.; Hegde, M.; Konstantinos, L. N.; Kruszka, P.; Leonard, D.; May, T.; McGinniss, M.; Pandya, V.; Schadt, E. E.; Greshake Tzovaras, B.; Zettler, B.; McGuire, A. L.; Green, R. C.; PeopleSeq Study Team,
Show abstract
Purpose: Elective genomic sequencing (EGS) returns monogenic disease findings in multiple genes, including potentially novel variants, and may also provide participants with carrier status, pharmacogenomic and other health-related information. The PeopleSeq Study assessed participants' motivations for and concerns about EGS and the associated clinical and psychosocial outcomes across diverse EGS providers. Methods: We administered a shared questionnaire to participants who chose to undergo EGS via 18 academic, clinical, or commercial EGS platforms. Results: We enrolled 1575 participants, of whom 1147 (72.8%) completed a questionnaire after receiving their EGS results. A majority (60.3%) of the participants who completed a post-result questionnaire self-reported receiving results they assessed as important, including negative findings, and 75.9% reported a form of health-related utility. Among a subset (19.4%) who shared their EGS reports, 16.6% (37 of n=223) received a monogenic finding and self-reported results deemed "important" were consistent with EGS reports. Most participants (74.1%) discussed their results with their family, but fewer discussed their results with a healthcare provider other than the site team (41.7%) or had one or more medical visits as a direct result of their EGS testing (23.1%). Participants expressed diverse motivations for EGS, with 91.4% expressing interest in their personal disease risk and 54% who expressed quasi-indication-based motivations related to family medical history. Individuals motivated by family history reported important results at a significantly higher rate. Conclusions: Early adopters of EGS are motivated by general interest in their health as well as quasi-indication-based considerations such as family history. A majority of participants learned results they considered medically important, but a much smaller segment engaged healthcare providers with their results.
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%
- The landscape of reported VUS in multi-gene panel and genomic testing: Time for a change 94%
- Distinct rates of VUS reclassification are observed when subclassifying VUS by evidence level 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Returning Actionable Genomic Results in a Research Biobank: Analytic Validity, Clinical Implementation and Resource Utilization 95%
- Validating data from Multiplex Assays of Variant Effect (MAVEs): A CanVIG-UK National Survey of NHS Clinical Scientists 92%
- Clinical genetics lacks standard definitions and protocols for the collection and use of diversity measures 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Qualitative Study Exploring the Consumer Experience of Receiving Self-Initiated Polygenic Risk Scores from a Third-Party Website 94%
- Defining the Critical Educational Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing: Views of US-Based Genetic Counselors and Medical Geneticists 94%
- Benefits and barriers to implementing precision preventive care: results of a national physician survey 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of optical genome mapping in clinical genetic testing of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy 90%
- Optical genome mapping as a next-generation cytogenomic tool for detection of structural and copy number variations for prenatal genomic analyses 90%
- The FORCE panel: An all-in-one SNP marker set for confirming investigative genetic genealogy leads and for general forensic applications 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Pooled Electronic Consultation Program to Improve Access to Genetics Specialists 93%
- 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 92%
- Combined Bioinformatic and Splicing Analysis of Likely Benign Intronic and Synonymous Variants Reveals Evidence for Pathogenicity 91%
"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.