Literature DB >> 23163796

Perspectives of clinical genetics professionals toward genome sequencing and incidental findings: a survey study.

A A Lemke1, D Bick, D Dimmock, P Simpson, R Veith.   

Abstract

The introduction of clinical genome-wide sequencing raises complex issues regarding the management of incidental findings. However, there is a lack of empirical studies assessing views of providers involved in potential disclosure of such findings. In an anonymous survey of 279 clinical genetics professionals, we found that the vast majority of participants agreed that they were interested in knowing about clinically actionable incidental findings in themselves (96%) and their child (99%), and they reported that these types of findings should be disclosed in adult (96%) and minor (98%) patients. Approximately three-fourths agreed that they were personally interested in knowing about an adult-onset clinically actionable disease (78%) and a childhood-onset non-clinically actionable disease (75%) in their child. A similar percentage of participants (70%) felt that these two types of findings should be disclosed to patients. Forty-four percent of participants wanted to know about an incidental finding that indicates an adult-onset non-clinically actionable condition in themselves and 31% wanted to know about this type of information in their child. Findings from this study revealed participants' views highly dependent on clinical actionability. Further research is needed with a broader population of geneticists to increase generalizability, and with diverse patients to assess their perspectives about results disclosure from clinical sequencing.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical genetics; ethics; genetics professionals; genomic sequencing; incidental findings; policy; return of results; secondary findings; whole genome sequencing

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23163796      PMCID: PMC3888159          DOI: 10.1111/cge.12060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  32 in total

1.  Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers.

Authors:  K L Edwards; A A Lemke; S B Trinidad; S M Lewis; H Starks; M T Quinn Griffin; G L Wiesner
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 2.000

2.  Use of whole-genome sequencing to diagnose a cryptic fusion oncogene.

Authors:  John S Welch; Peter Westervelt; Li Ding; David E Larson; Jeffery M Klco; Shashikant Kulkarni; John Wallis; Ken Chen; Jacqueline E Payton; Robert S Fulton; Joelle Veizer; Heather Schmidt; Tammi L Vickery; Sharon Heath; Mark A Watson; Michael H Tomasson; Daniel C Link; Timothy A Graubert; John F DiPersio; Elaine R Mardis; Timothy J Ley; Richard K Wilson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-04-20       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 3.  Carrier testing in minors: a systematic review of guidelines and position papers.

Authors:  Pascal Borry; Jean-Pierre Fryns; Paul Schotsmans; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 4.  Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

Authors:  Susan M Wolf; Frances P Lawrenz; Charles A Nelson; Jeffrey P Kahn; Mildred K Cho; Ellen Wright Clayton; Joel G Fletcher; Michael K Georgieff; Dale Hammerschmidt; Kathy Hudson; Judy Illes; Vivek Kapur; Moira A Keane; Barbara A Koenig; Bonnie S Leroy; Elizabeth G McFarland; Jordan Paradise; Lisa S Parker; Sharon F Terry; Brian Van Ness; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.718

5.  Ethical implications of including children in a large biobank for genetic-epidemiologic research: a qualitative study of public opinion.

Authors:  David Kaufman; Gail Geller; Lisa Leroy; Juli Murphy; Joan Scott; Kathy Hudson
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 3.908

6.  Points to consider: ethical, legal, and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. American Society of Human Genetics Board of Directors, American College of Medical Genetics Board of Directors.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 11.025

7.  Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing.

Authors:  Robert C Green; Jonathan S Berg; Gerard T Berry; Leslie G Biesecker; David P Dimmock; James P Evans; Wayne W Grody; Madhuri R Hegde; Sarah Kalia; Bruce R Korf; Ian Krantz; Amy L McGuire; David T Miller; Michael F Murray; Robert L Nussbaum; Sharon E Plon; Heidi L Rehm; Howard J Jacob
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  The advent of personal genome sequencing.

Authors:  Radoje Drmanac
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  A timely arrival for genomic medicine.

Authors:  Alan N Mayer; David P Dimmock; Marjorie J Arca; David P Bick; James W Verbsky; Elizabeth A Worthey; Howard J Jacob; David A Margolis
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  Genetic counseling and testing for Alzheimer disease: joint practice guidelines of the American College of Medical Genetics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Authors:  Jill S Goldman; Susan E Hahn; Jennifer Williamson Catania; Susan LaRusse-Eckert; Melissa Barber Butson; Malia Rumbaugh; Michelle N Strecker; J Scott Roberts; Wylie Burke; Richard Mayeux; Thomas Bird
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  38 in total

1.  Incidental diagnosis of HLRCC following investigation for Asperger Syndrome: actionable and actioned.

Authors:  Bich-Thu Duong; Ravi Savarirayan; Ingrid Winship
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 2.  Incidental findings from clinical genome-wide sequencing: a review.

Authors:  Z Lohn; S Adam; P H Birch; J M Friedman
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-05-26       Impact factor: 2.537

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

Authors:  Elli G Gourna; Natalie Armstrong; Susan E Wallace
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Incidental or secondary findings: an integrative and patient-inclusive approach to the current debate.

Authors:  Marlies Saelaert; Heidi Mertes; Elfride De Baere; Ignaas Devisch
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Lynch syndrome patients' views of and preferences for return of results following whole exome sequencing.

Authors:  Kelly Hitch; Galen Joseph; Jenna Guiltinan; Jessica Kianmahd; Janey Youngblom; Amie Blanco
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Attitudes among South African university staff and students towards disclosing secondary genetic findings.

Authors:  Georgina Spies; Jolynne Mokaya; Jacqui Steadman; Nicole Schuitmaker; Martin Kidd; S M J Hemmings; Jonathan A Carr; Helena Kuivaniemi; Soraya Seedat
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2020-11-20

7.  Return of results: ethical and legal distinctions between research and clinical care.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; Barbara J Evans; Gail P Jarvik
Journal:  Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet       Date:  2014-03-10       Impact factor: 3.908

8.  Research Participants' Preferences for Hypothetical Secondary Results from Genomic Research.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; Josue Martinez; Jimmy Duong; Codruta Chiuzan; Jo C Phelan; Abby Fyer; Robert L Klitzman; Paul S Appelbaum; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-12-29       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  'Information is information': a public perspective on incidental findings in clinical and research genome-based testing.

Authors:  S Daack-Hirsch; M Driessnack; A Hanish; V A Johnson; L L Shah; C M Simon; J K Williams
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 4.438

10.  A Clinical Service to Support the Return of Secondary Genomic Findings in Human Research.

Authors:  Andrew J Darnell; Howard Austin; David A Bluemke; Richard O Cannon; Kenneth Fischbeck; William Gahl; David Goldman; Christine Grady; Mark H Greene; Steven M Holland; Sara Chandros Hull; Forbes D Porter; David Resnik; Wendy S Rubinstein; Leslie G Biesecker
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 11.025

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.