Literature DB >> 29168042

Impact of Receiving Secondary Results from Genomic Research: A 12-Month Longitudinal Study.

Julia Wynn1, Josue Martinez1, Jessica Bulafka1, Jimmy Duong2, Yuan Zhang2, Codruta Chiuzan2, Jain Preti3, Maria L Cremona4, Vaidehi Jobanputra5, Abby J Fyer6, Robert L Klitzman6, Paul S Appelbaum6, Wendy K Chung7,8.   

Abstract

The impact of returning secondary results from exome sequencing (ES) on patients/participants is important to understand as ES is increasingly utilized in clinical care and research. Participants were recruited from studies using ES and were separated into two arms: 107 who had ES and were offered the choice to learn secondary results (ES group) and 85 who had not yet had ES (No ES group). Questionnaires were administered at baseline and 1 and 12 months, following results disclosure (ES group) or enrollment (No ES group). While the majority (65%) elected to learn all results following pre-test counseling, it was reduced from the 76% who indicated a desire for all results at baseline. Thirty-seven percent received results associated with an increased personal disease risk. There were no differences in changes in any of the psychological and social measures from baseline to post-results disclosure between the ES and No ES groups. Receiving a wide range of secondary findings appeared to have little measurable impact on most participants. The experience of learning secondary results may be related to participants' previous experiences with genetics, as well as the genetic counseling provided. Future research with a more diverse, genetically naïve group, as well as scalable methods of delivery, is needed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Exome sequencing; Genetic counseling; Incidental findings; Psychosocial measures; Secondary findings

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29168042      PMCID: PMC5945295          DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0172-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  46 in total

Review 1.  Managing the ethical challenges of next-generation sequencing in genomic medicine.

Authors:  Angus J Clarke
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 4.291

2.  A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire.

Authors:  David Cella; Chanita Hughes; Amy Peterman; Chih-Hung Chang; Beth N Peshkin; Marc D Schwartz; Lari Wenzel; Amy Lemke; Alfred C Marcus; Caryn Lerman
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.267

3.  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

4.  Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders. Patient Health Questionnaire.

Authors:  R L Spitzer; K Kroenke; J B Williams
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-11-10       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Association of Researcher Characteristics with Views on Return of Incidental Findings from Genomic Research.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; Josue Martinez; Jimmy Duong; Yuan Zhang; Jo Phelan; Abby Fyer; Robert Klitzman; Paul S Appelbaum; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 6.  Next-generation sequencing in the clinic: are we ready?

Authors:  Leslie G Biesecker; Wylie Burke; Isaac Kohane; Sharon E Plon; Ron Zimmern
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 53.242

7.  Preliminary validation of the Satisfaction With Decision scale with depressed primary care patients.

Authors:  Celia E Wills; Margaret Holmes-Rovner
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.

Authors:  Sarah S Kalia; Kathy Adelman; Sherri J Bale; Wendy K Chung; Christine Eng; James P Evans; Gail E Herman; Sophia B Hufnagel; Teri E Klein; Bruce R Korf; Kent D McKelvey; Kelly E Ormond; C Sue Richards; Christopher N Vlangos; Michael Watson; Christa L Martin; David T Miller
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Psychological and behavioural impact of returning personal results from whole-genome sequencing: the HealthSeq project.

Authors:  Saskia C Sanderson; Michael D Linderman; Sabrina A Suckiel; Randi Zinberg; Melissa Wasserstein; Andrew Kasarskis; George A Diaz; Eric E Schadt
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Understanding the Psychosocial Effects of WES Test Results on Parents of Children with Rare Diseases.

Authors:  Lotte Krabbenborg; L E L M Vissers; J Schieving; T Kleefstra; E J Kamsteeg; J A Veltman; M A Willemsen; S Van der Burg
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 2.537

View more
  11 in total

1.  User engagement with web-based genomics education videos and implications for designing scalable patient education materials.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; Wei Wei; Xinhang Li; Yat S So; Suzanne Bakken; Chunhua Weng; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2020-03-04

2.  Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Mwenza Blell; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Lorraine Cowley; Stephanie O M Dyke; Clara Gaff; Robert Green; Alison Hall; Amber L Johns; Bartha M Knoppers; Stephanie Mulrine; Christine Patch; Eva Winkler; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  From Genotype to Phenotype.

Authors:  Michael Mackley; Karen McGuire; Jenny Taylor; Hugh Watkins; Elizabeth Ormondroyd
Journal:  Circ Genom Precis Med       Date:  2018-10

4.  Cases in Precision Medicine: Should You Participate in a Study Involving Genomic Sequencing of Your Patients?

Authors:  Paul S Appelbaum; Deborah F Stiles; Wendy Chung
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Decisional conflict among adolescents and parents making decisions about genomic sequencing results.

Authors:  Preethi Raghuram Pillai; Cynthia A Prows; Lisa J Martin; Melanie F Myers
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 4.438

6.  The role of digital tools in the delivery of genomic medicine: enhancing patient-centered care.

Authors:  Salma Shickh; Sara A Rafferty; Marc Clausen; Rita Kodida; Chloe Mighton; Seema Panchal; Justin Lorentz; Thomas Ward; Nicholas Watkins; Christine Elser; Andrea Eisen; June C Carroll; Emily Glogowski; Kasmintan A Schrader; Jordan Lerner-Ellis; Raymond H Kim; David Chitayat; Cheryl Shuman; Yvonne Bombard
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 8.864

7.  Participant choices for return of genomic results in the eMERGE Network.

Authors:  Christin Hoell; Julia Wynn; Luke V Rasmussen; Keith Marsolo; Sharon A Aufox; Wendy K Chung; John J Connolly; Robert R Freimuth; David Kochan; Hakon Hakonarson; Margaret Harr; Ingrid A Holm; Iftikhar J Kullo; Philip E Lammers; Kathleen A Leppig; Nancy D Leslie; Melanie F Myers; Richard R Sharp; Maureen E Smith; Cynthia A Prows
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 8.864

8.  Approaches to carrier testing and results disclosure in translational genomics research: The clinical sequencing exploratory research consortium experience.

Authors:  Kathryn M Porter; Tia L Kauffman; Barbara A Koenig; Katie L Lewis; Heidi L Rehm; Carolyn Sue Richards; Natasha T Strande; Holly K Tabor; Susan M Wolf; Yaping Yang; Laura M Amendola; Danielle R Azzariti; Jonathan S Berg; Katie Bergstrom; Leslie G Biesecker; Sawona Biswas; Kevin M Bowling; Wendy K Chung; Ellen W Clayton; Laura K Conlin; Gregory M Cooper; Matthew C Dulik; Levi A Garraway; Arezou A Ghazani; Robert C Green; Susan M Hiatt; Seema M Jamal; Gail P Jarvik; Katrina A B Goddard; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 2.183

9.  Perspectives on returning individual and aggregate genomic research results to study participants and communities in Kenya: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Isaac Kisiangani; Shukri F Mohamed; Catherine Kyobutungi; Paulina Tindana; Anita Ghansah; Michele Ramsay; Gershim Asiki
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 2.834

10.  Pilot Study of Return of Genetic Results to Patients in Adult Nephrology.

Authors:  Jordan G Nestor; Maddalena Marasa; Hila Milo-Rasouly; Emily E Groopman; S Ali Husain; Sumit Mohan; Hilda Fernandez; Vimla S Aggarwal; Dina F Ahram; Natalie Vena; Kelsie Bogyo; Andrew S Bomback; Jai Radhakrishnan; Gerald B Appel; Wooin Ahn; David J Cohen; Pietro A Canetta; Geoffrey K Dube; Maya K Rao; Heather K Morris; Russell J Crew; Simone Sanna-Cherchi; Krzysztof Kiryluk; Ali G Gharavi
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 10.614

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.