Literature DB >> 24863757

Patient experiences with gene panels based on exome sequencing in clinical diagnostics: high acceptance and low distress.

A S Sie1, J B Prins, W A G van Zelst-Stams, J A Veltman, I Feenstra, N Hoogerbrugge.   

Abstract

The Radboud University Medical Center was among the first to implement two-step exome sequencing in clinical genetic diagnostics. This study is the first to evaluate patient experiences with gene panels based on exome sequencing, using quantified psychological variables: acceptance, psychological distress, expectations of heredity and unsolicited findings. Between August 2011 and July 2012, 177 patients diagnosed with early-onset colorectal/kidney cancer, deafness, blindness or movement disorder consented to diagnostic exome sequencing offered by clinical geneticists. Baseline questionnaires were sent to 141 adults, returned by 111 with median age of 49 [22-79] years and positive family history in 81%. Follow-up included 91 responders at median 4 [2-22] weeks after results from known gene panels per diagnosis group; exome-wide analysis is ongoing. Confirmed or possibly pathogenic mutations were found in 31% with one unsolicited finding (oncogenetic panel). Most patients (92%) were satisfied. There were no significant changes in heredity-specific distress (18% at baseline, 17% at follow-up) and expectations of heredity. Fewer patients expected unsolicited findings at follow-up (29% vs 18%, p = 0.01). Satisfaction and distress were equal in those with vs without mutations. In conclusion, most adults accepted and were satisfied with gene panels based on diagnostic exome sequencing, few reporting distress.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  distress; exome; gene panels; genetic; next generation; patient experiences; sequencing

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24863757     DOI: 10.1111/cge.12433

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


  11 in total

1.  Screening for germline mutations in mismatch repair genes in patients with Lynch syndrome by next generation sequencing.

Authors:  Barbara Luísa Soares; Ayslan Castro Brant; Renan Gomes; Tatiane Pastor; Naye Balzan Schneider; Ândrea Ribeiro-Dos-Santos; Paulo Pimentel de Assumpção; Maria Isabel W Achatz; Patrícia Ashton-Prolla; Miguel Angelo Martins Moreira
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.375

2.  Psychosocial and behavioral outcomes of genomic testing in cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tatiane Yanes; Amanda M Willis; Bettina Meiser; Katherine M Tucker; Megan Best
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  VariantDB: a flexible annotation and filtering portal for next generation sequencing data.

Authors:  Geert Vandeweyer; Lut Van Laer; Bart Loeys; Tim Van den Bulcke; R Frank Kooy
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 11.117

4.  A clinical utility study of exome sequencing versus conventional genetic testing in pediatric neurology.

Authors:  Lisenka E L M Vissers; Kirsten J M van Nimwegen; Jolanda H Schieving; Erik-Jan Kamsteeg; Tjitske Kleefstra; Helger G Yntema; Rolph Pfundt; Gert Jan van der Wilt; Lotte Krabbenborg; Han G Brunner; Simone van der Burg; Janneke Grutters; Joris A Veltman; Michèl A A P Willemsen
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 5.  Next-Generation Sequencing in Oncology: Genetic Diagnosis, Risk Prediction and Cancer Classification.

Authors:  Rick Kamps; Rita D Brandão; Bianca J van den Bosch; Aimee D C Paulussen; Sofia Xanthoulea; Marinus J Blok; Andrea Romano
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Effects of participation in a U.S. trial of newborn genomic sequencing on parents at risk for depression.

Authors:  Talia S Schwartz; Kurt D Christensen; Melissa K Uveges; Susan E Waisbren; Amy L McGuire; Stacey Pereira; Jill O Robinson; Alan H Beggs; Robert C Green; Gloria A Bachmann; Arnold B Rabson; Ingrid A Holm
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  High Satisfaction and Low Distress in Breast Cancer Patients One Year after BRCA-Mutation Testing without Prior Face-to-Face Genetic Counseling.

Authors:  Aisha S Sie; Liesbeth Spruijt; Wendy A G van Zelst-Stams; Arjen R Mensenkamp; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; Han G Brunner; Judith B Prins; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Participant use and communication of findings from exome sequencing: a mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Katie L Lewis; Gillian W Hooker; Philip D Connors; Travis C Hyams; Martha F Wright; Samantha Caldwell; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Molecular diagnosis of muscular diseases in outpatient clinics: A Canadian perspective.

Authors:  Fanny Thuriot; Elaine Gravel; Caroline Buote; Marianne Doyon; Elvy Lapointe; Lydia Marcoux; Sandrine Larue; Amélie Nadeau; Sébastien Chénier; Paula J Waters; Pierre-Étienne Jacques; Serge Gravel; Sébastien Lévesque
Journal:  Neurol Genet       Date:  2020-03-13

10.  Psychosocial outcomes following germline multigene panel testing in an ethnically and economically diverse cohort of patients.

Authors:  Julie O Culver; Charité N Ricker; Joseph Bonner; John Kidd; Duveen Sturgeon; Rachel Hodan; Kerry Kingham; Katrina Lowstuter; Nicolette M Chun; Alexandra P Lebensohn; Courtney Rowe-Teeter; Peter Levonian; Katlyn Partynski; Karlena Lara-Otero; Christine Hong; Jennifer Morales Pichardo; Meredith A Mills; Krystal Brown; Caryn Lerman; Uri Ladabaum; Kevin J McDonnell; James M Ford; Stephen B Gruber; Allison W Kurian; Gregory E Idos
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 6.921

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.