Literature DB >> 25684271

Reporting incidental findings in genomic scale clinical sequencing--a clinical laboratory perspective: a report of the Association for Molecular Pathology.

Madhuri Hegde1, Sherri Bale2, Pinar Bayrak-Toydemir3, Jane Gibson4, Linda Jo Bone Jeng5, Loren Joseph6, Jordan Laser7, Ira M Lubin8, Christine E Miller9, Lainie F Ross10, Paul G Rothberg11, Alice K Tanner12, Patrik Vitazka2, Rong Mao3.   

Abstract

Advances in sequencing technologies have facilitated concurrent testing for many disorders, and the results generated may provide information about a patient's health that is unrelated to the clinical indication, commonly referred to as incidental findings. This is a paradigm shift from traditional genetic testing in which testing and reporting are tailored to a patient's specific clinical condition. Clinical laboratories and physicians are wrestling with this increased complexity in genomic testing and reporting of the incidental findings to patients. An enormous amount of discussion has taken place since the release of a set of recommendations from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. This discussion has largely focused on the content of the incidental findings, but the laboratory perspective and patient autonomy have been overlooked. This report by the Association of Molecular Pathology workgroup discusses the pros and cons of next-generation sequencing technology, potential benefits, and harms for reporting of incidental findings, including the effect on both the laboratory and the patient, and compares those with other areas of medicine. The importance of genetic counseling to preserve patient autonomy is also reviewed. The discussion and recommendations presented by the workgroup underline the need for continued research and discussion among all stakeholders to improve our understanding of the effect of different policies on patients, providers, and laboratories.
Copyright © 2015 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25684271      PMCID: PMC5707203          DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2014.10.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Diagn        ISSN: 1525-1578            Impact factor:   5.568


  32 in total

1.  The incidentalome: a threat to genomic medicine.

Authors:  Isaac S Kohane; Daniel R Masys; Russ B Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-07-12       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Mandatory extended searches in all genome sequencing: "incidental findings," patient autonomy, and shared decision making.

Authors:  Lainie Friedman Ross; Mark A Rothstein; Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  New approaches to molecular diagnosis.

Authors:  Bruce R Korf; Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee.

Authors:  Lincoln L Berland; Stuart G Silverman; Richard M Gore; William W Mayo-Smith; Alec J Megibow; Judy Yee; James A Brink; Mark E Baker; Michael P Federle; W Dennis Foley; Isaac R Francis; Brian R Herts; Gary M Israel; Glenn Krinsky; Joel F Platt; William P Shuman; Andrew J Taylor
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 5.  Disease-targeted sequencing: a cornerstone in the clinic.

Authors:  Heidi L Rehm
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 53.242

6.  Point-counterpoint. Ethics and genomic incidental findings.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Steven Joffe; Barbara A Koenig; Barbara B Biesecker; Laurence B McCullough; Jennifer S Blumenthal-Barby; Timothy Caulfield; Sharon F Terry; Robert C Green
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Secondary researchers' duties to return incidental findings and individual research results: a partial-entrustment account.

Authors:  Henry S Richardson; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Genetic incidental findings: autonomy regained?

Authors:  Effy Vayena; John Tasioulas
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Patient decisions for disclosure of secondary findings among the first 200 individuals undergoing clinical diagnostic exome sequencing.

Authors:  Layla Shahmirzadi; Elizabeth C Chao; Erika Palmaer; Melissa C Parra; Sha Tang; Kelly D Farwell Gonzalez
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  Technical report: Ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children.

Authors:  Lainie Friedman Ross; Laine Friedman Ross; Howard M Saal; Karen L David; Rebecca R Anderson
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  23 in total

1.  Connecting Gaucher and Parkinson Disease: Considerations for Clinical and Research Genetic Counseling Settings.

Authors:  Lola Cook; Jeanine Schulze
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Regulating whole exome sequencing as a diagnostic test.

Authors:  Valentina Lapin; Lindsey C Mighion; Cristina P da Silva; Ymkje Cuperus; Lora J H Bean; Madhuri R Hegde
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 3.  Towards a Universal Molecular Microbiological Test.

Authors:  Richard J N Allcock; Amy V Jennison; David Warrilow
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Practices and views of neurologists regarding the use of whole-genome sequencing in clinical settings: a web-based survey.

Authors:  Iris Jaitovich Groisman; Thierry Hurlimann; Amir Shoham; Béatrice Godard
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Not the End of the Odyssey: Parental Perceptions of Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) in Pediatric Undiagnosed Disorders.

Authors:  Allyn McConkie Rosell; Loren D M Pena; Kelly Schoch; Rebecca Spillmann; Jennifer Sullivan; Stephen R Hooper; Yong-Hui Jiang; Nicolas Mathey-Andrews; David B Goldstein; Vandana Shashi
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 6.  Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation and Reporting of Sequence Variants in Cancer: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and College of American Pathologists.

Authors:  Marilyn M Li; Michael Datto; Eric J Duncavage; Shashikant Kulkarni; Neal I Lindeman; Somak Roy; Apostolia M Tsimberidou; Cindy L Vnencak-Jones; Daynna J Wolff; Anas Younes; Marina N Nikiforova
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 5.568

7.  CAGI4 SickKids clinical genomes challenge: A pipeline for identifying pathogenic variants.

Authors:  Lipika R Pal; Kunal Kundu; Yizhou Yin; John Moult
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 4.878

8.  Cancer biomarker discovery and validation.

Authors:  Nicolas Goossens; Shigeki Nakagawa; Xiaochen Sun; Yujin Hoshida
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.241

9.  Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maia J Frieser; Sylia Wilson; Scott Vrieze
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 4.267

10.  The Continuing Evolution of Ethical Standards for Genomic Sequencing in Clinical Care: Restoring Patient Choice.

Authors:  Susan M Wolf
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 1.718

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.