Importance: A critical bottleneck in clinical genomics is the mismatch between large volumes of results and the availability of knowledgeable professionals to return them. Objective: To test whether a web-based platform is noninferior to a genetic counselor for educating patients about their carrier results from exome sequencing. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized noninferiority trial conducted in a longitudinal sequencing cohort at the National Institutes of Health from February 5, 2014, to December 16, 2016, was used to compare the web-based platform with a genetic counselor. Among the 571 eligible participants, 1 to 7 heterozygous variants were identified in genes that cause a phenotype that is recessively inherited. Surveys were administered after cohort enrollment, immediately following trial education, and 1 month and 6 months later to primarily healthy postreproductive participants who expressed interest in learning their carrier results. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were applied. Interventions: A web-based platform that integrated education on carrier results with personal test results was designed to directly parallel disclosure education by a genetic counselor. The sessions took a mean (SD) time of 21 (10.6), and 27 (9.3) minutes, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes and noninferiority margins (δNI) were knowledge (0 to 8, δNI = -1), test-specific distress (0 to 30, δNI = +1), and decisional conflict (15 to 75, δNI = +6). Results:After 462 participants (80.9%) provided consent and were randomized, all but 3 participants (n = 459) completed surveys following education and counseling; 398 (86.1%) completed 1-month surveys and 392 (84.8%) completed 6-month surveys. Participants were predominantly well-educated, non-Hispanic white, married parents; mean (SD) age was 63 (63.1) years and 246 (53.6%) were men. The web platform was noninferior to the genetic counselor on outcomes assessed at 1 and 6 months: knowledge (mean group difference, -0.18; lower limit of 97.5% CI, -0.63; δNI = -1), test-specific distress (median group difference, 0; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 0; δNI = +1), and decisional conflict about choosing to learn results (mean group difference, 1.18; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 2.66; δNI = +6). There were no significant differences between the genetic counselors and web-based platform detected between modes of education delivery in disclosure rates to spouses (151 vs 159; relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.64-1.69; P > .99), children (103 vs 117; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.36; P = .59), or siblings (91 vs 78; RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.94-1.46; P = .18). Conclusions and Relevance: This trial demonstrates noninferiority of web-based return of carrier results among postreproductive, mostly healthy adults. Replication studies among younger and more diverse populations are needed to establish generalizability. Yet return of results via a web-based platform may be sufficient for subsets of test results, reserving genetic counselors for return of results with a greater health threat. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00410241.
RCT Entities:
Importance: A critical bottleneck in clinical genomics is the mismatch between large volumes of results and the availability of knowledgeable professionals to return them. Objective: To test whether a web-based platform is noninferior to a genetic counselor for educating patients about their carrier results from exome sequencing. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized noninferiority trial conducted in a longitudinal sequencing cohort at the National Institutes of Health from February 5, 2014, to December 16, 2016, was used to compare the web-based platform with a genetic counselor. Among the 571 eligible participants, 1 to 7 heterozygous variants were identified in genes that cause a phenotype that is recessively inherited. Surveys were administered after cohort enrollment, immediately following trial education, and 1 month and 6 months later to primarily healthy postreproductive participants who expressed interest in learning their carrier results. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were applied. Interventions: A web-based platform that integrated education on carrier results with personal test results was designed to directly parallel disclosure education by a genetic counselor. The sessions took a mean (SD) time of 21 (10.6), and 27 (9.3) minutes, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes and noninferiority margins (δNI) were knowledge (0 to 8, δNI = -1), test-specific distress (0 to 30, δNI = +1), and decisional conflict (15 to 75, δNI = +6). Results: After 462 participants (80.9%) provided consent and were randomized, all but 3 participants (n = 459) completed surveys following education and counseling; 398 (86.1%) completed 1-month surveys and 392 (84.8%) completed 6-month surveys. Participants were predominantly well-educated, non-Hispanic white, married parents; mean (SD) age was 63 (63.1) years and 246 (53.6%) were men. The web platform was noninferior to the genetic counselor on outcomes assessed at 1 and 6 months: knowledge (mean group difference, -0.18; lower limit of 97.5% CI, -0.63; δNI = -1), test-specific distress (median group difference, 0; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 0; δNI = +1), and decisional conflict about choosing to learn results (mean group difference, 1.18; upper limit of 97.5% CI, 2.66; δNI = +6). There were no significant differences between the genetic counselors and web-based platform detected between modes of education delivery in disclosure rates to spouses (151 vs 159; relative risk [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.64-1.69; P > .99), children (103 vs 117; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.36; P = .59), or siblings (91 vs 78; RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.94-1.46; P = .18). Conclusions and Relevance: This trial demonstrates noninferiority of web-based return of carrier results among postreproductive, mostly healthy adults. Replication studies among younger and more diverse populations are needed to establish generalizability. Yet return of results via a web-based platform may be sufficient for subsets of test results, reserving genetic counselors for return of results with a greater health threat. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00410241.
Authors: Robert Resta; Barbara Bowles Biesecker; Robin L Bennett; Sandra Blum; Susan Estabrooks Hahn; Michelle N Strecker; Janet L Williams Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 2.537
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
Authors: Barbara A Athens; Samantha L Caldwell; Kendall L Umstead; Philip D Connors; Ethan Brenna; Barbara B Biesecker Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Leslie G Biesecker; James C Mullikin; Flavia M Facio; Clesson Turner; Praveen F Cherukuri; Robert W Blakesley; Gerard G Bouffard; Peter S Chines; Pedro Cruz; Nancy F Hansen; Jamie K Teer; Baishali Maskeri; Alice C Young; Teri A Manolio; Alexander F Wilson; Toren Finkel; Paul Hwang; Andrew Arai; Alan T Remaley; Vandana Sachdev; Robert Shamburek; Richard O Cannon; Eric D Green Journal: Genome Res Date: 2009-07-14 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: K L Wilson; J L Czerwinski; J M Hoskovec; S J Noblin; C M Sullivan; A Harbison; M W Campion; K Devary; P Devers; C N Singletary Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2012-11-22 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Katie L Lewis; Paul K J Han; Gillian W Hooker; William M P Klein; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katie L Lewis; Kendall L Umstead; Jennifer J Johnston; Ilana M Miller; Lydia J Thompson; Kristen P Fishler; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Allecia E Reid; Rebecca A Ferrer; Sanjana Kadirvel; Barbara B Biesecker; Katie L Lewis; Leslie G Biesecker; William M P Klein Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Arielle S Gillman; Irina A Iles; William M P Klein; Barbara B Biesecker; Katie L Lewis; Leslie G Biesecker; Rebecca A Ferrer Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2021-09-04
Authors: Kendall L Umstead; Paul K J Han; Katie L Lewis; Ilana M Miller; Charlotte L Hepler; Lydia J Thompson; Tyra G Wolfsberg; Anh-Dao Nguyen; Mark T Fredriksen; Gretchen Gibney; Erin Turbitt; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Barbara B Biesecker; Sarah E Lillie; Laura M Amendola; Katherine E Donohue; Kelly M East; Ann Katherine M Foreman; Marian J Gilmore; Veronica Greve; Billie Liangolou; Julianne M O'Daniel; Jacqueline A Odgis; Shannon Rego; Bradley Rolf; Sarah Scollon; Sabrina A Suckiel; Jamilyn Zepp; Galen Joseph Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2020-12-05 Impact factor: 2.537