Points to Consider in the Clinical Use of NGS Panels for Mitochondrial Disease: An Analysis of Gene Inclusion and Consent Forms

Mitochondrial next generation sequencing (NGS) panels offer single-step analysis of the numerous nuclear genes involved in the structure, function, and maintenance of mitochondria. However, the complexities of mitochondrial biology and genetics raise points for consideration in clinical use of these tests. To understand the current status of mitochondrial genetic testing, we assessed the gene offerings and consent forms of mitochondrial NGS panels available from seven US-based clinical laboratories. The NGS panels varied markedly in number of genes (101–1204 genes), and the proportion of genes causing “classic” mitochondrial diseases and their phenocopies ranged widely between labs (18 %–94 % of panel contents). All panels included genes not associated with classic mitochondrial diseases (6 %–28 % of panel contents), including genes causing adult-onset neurodegenerative disorders, cancer predisposition, and other genetic syndromes or inborn errors of metabolism. Five of the panels included genes that are not listed in OMIM to be associated with a disease phenotype (5 %–49 % of panel contents). None of the consent documents reviewed had options for patient preference regarding receipt of incidental findings. These findings raise points of discussion applicable to mitochondrial diagnostics, but also to the larger arenas of exome and genome sequencing, including the need to consider the boundaries between clinical and research testing, the necessity of appropriate informed consent, and the responsibilities of clinical laboratories and clinicians. Based on these findings, we recommend careful evaluation by laboratories of the genes offered on NGS panels, clear communication of the predicted phenotypes, and revised consent forms to allow patients to make choices about receiving incidental findings. We hope that our analysis and recommendations will help to maximize the considerable clinical utility of NGS panels for the diagnosis of mitochondrial disease.     

The Evolution of Cancer Risk Assessment in the Era of Next Generation Sequencing

Cancer genetics professionals face a new opportunity and challenge in adapting to the availability of cancer genetic testing panels, now available as a result of Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technology. While cancer panels have been available for over a year, we believe that there is not yet enough data to create practice guidelines. Despite this, a year of experience allows us to provide our opinion on points to consider as cancer genetic counselors incorporate this testing technology into genetic counseling practice models. NGS technology offers the ability to potentially diagnose hereditary cancer syndromes more efficiently by testing many genes at once for a fraction of what it would cost to test each gene individually. However, there are limitations and additional risks to consider with these tests. Obtaining informed consent for concurrent testing of multiple genes requires that genetics professionals modify their discussions with patients regarding the potential cancer risks and the associated implications to medical management. We propose dividing the genes on each panel into categories that vary by degree of cancer risk (e.g. penetrance of the syndrome) and availability of management guidelines, with the aim to improve patient understanding of the range of information that can come from this testing. The increased risk for identifying variants of uncertain significance (VUS) when testing many genes at once must be discussed with patients. Pretest genetic counseling must also include the possibility to receive unexpected results as well as the potential to receive a result in the absence of related medical management guidelines. It is also important to consider whether a single gene test remains the best testing option for some patients. As panels expand, it is important that documentation reflects exactly which genes have been analyzed for each patient. While this technology holds the promise of more efficient diagnosis for many of our patients, it also comes with new challenges that we must recognize and address.     

Genetic Counselors’ Experiences Regarding Communication of Reproductive Risks with Autosomal Recessive Conditions found on Cancer Panels

The development of hereditary cancer genetic testing panels has altered genetic counseling practice. Mutations within certain genes on cancer panels pose not only a cancer risk, but also a reproductive risk for autosomal recessive conditions such as Fanconi anemia, constitutional mismatch repair deficiency syndrome, and ataxia telangiectasia. This study aimed to determine if genetic counselors discuss reproductive risks for autosomal recessive conditions associated with genes included on cancer panels, and if so, under what circumstances these risks are discussed. An on-line survey was emailed through the NSGC list-serv. The survey assessed 189 cancer genetic counselors' experiences discussing reproductive risks with patients at risk to carry a mutation or variant of uncertain significance (VUS) in a gene associated with both an autosomal dominant cancer risk and an autosomal recessive syndrome. Over half (n = 82, 55 %) reported having discussed reproductive risks; the remainder (n = 66, 45 %) had not. Genetic counselors who reported discussing reproductive risks primarily did so when patients had a positive result and were of reproductive age. Reasons for not discussing these risks included when a patient had completed childbearing or when a VUS was identified. Most counselors discussed reproductive risk after obtaining results and not during the informed consent process. There is inconsistency as to if and when the discussion of reproductive risks is taking place. The wide variation in responses suggests a need to develop professional guidelines for when and how discussions of reproductive risk for autosomal recessive conditions identified through cancer panels should occur with patients.     

A Clinical Decision Support Tool to Predict Cancer Risk for Commonly Tested Cancer-Related Germline Mutations

The rapid drop in the cost of DNA sequencing led to the availability of multi-gene panels, which test 25 or more cancer susceptibility genes for a low cost. Clinicians and genetic counselors need a tool to interpret results, understand risk of various cancers, and advise on a management strategy. This is challenging as there are multiple studies regarding each gene, and it is not possible for clinicians and genetic counselors to be aware of all publications, nor to appreciate the relative accuracy and importance of each. Through an extensive literature review, we have identified reliable studies and derived estimates of absolute risk. We have also developed a systematic mechanism and informatics tools for (1) data curation, (2) the evaluation of quality of studies, and (3) the statistical analysis necessary to obtain risk. We produced the risk prediction clinical decision support tool ASK2ME (All Syndromes Known to Man Evaluator). It provides absolute cancer risk predictions for various hereditary cancer susceptibility genes. These predictions are specific to patients’ gene carrier status, age, and history of relevant prophylactic surgery. By allowing clinicians to enter patient information and receive patient-specific cancer risks, this tool aims to have a significant impact on the quality of precision cancer prevention and disease management activities relying on panel testing. It is important to note that this tool is dynamic and constantly being updated, and currently, some of its limitations include (1) for many gene-cancer associations risk estimates are based on one study rather than meta-analysis, (2) strong assumptions on prior cancers, (3) lack of uncertainty measures, and (4) risk estimates for a growing set of gene-cancer associations which are not always variant specific. All of these concerns are being addressed on an ongoing basis, aiming to make the tool even more accurate.     

Next Generation Sequencing in the Clinic: a Patterns of Care Study in a Retrospective Cohort of Subjects Referred to a Genetic Medicine Clinic for Suspected Lynch Syndrome

Next generation sequencing (NGS) gene panels are increasingly used in medical genetics clinics for the evaluation of common inherited cancer syndromes, but the clinical efficacy of these tests, and the factors driving clinical providers to order them are unclear. We conducted a patterns-of-care study to compare patients evaluated with NGS gene panels with a reference group. We abstracted demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical information in a retrospective cohort of patients referred to a large medical genetics clinic for evaluation of inherited colorectal cancer and polyposis syndromes. Patients tested with NGS gene panels were more likely to be insured compared to the reference group (85.3 % vs. 69.2 %, p = 0.0068),less likely to have prior tumor tissue testing (29.4 % vs. 54.3 %, p = 0.0004), and less likely to have an abnormal tumor tissue test result (46.7 % vs. 74.5 %, p = 0.01). No significant differences were found between groups in age, gender, race, employment status, personal history of colorectal cancer, or proportion of patients fulfilling Lynch syndrome clinical criteria. Patients with NGS testing were less likely to have a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant detected (13.7 % vs. 31.9 %, p = 0.002). Patients referred for NGS testing to evaluate inherited colorectal cancer/polyposis risk appear to undergo tumor tissue testing less frequently than non-NGS testing patients. Further studies are needed to assess the most effective and cost-effective approach to genomic diagnosis in this patient population.     

Genetic Counselors’ Views and Experiences with the Clinical Integration of Genome Sequencing

In recent years, new sequencing technologies known as next generation sequencing (NGS) have provided scientists the ability to rapidly sequence all known coding as well as non-coding sequences in the human genome. As the two emerging approaches, whole exome (WES) and whole genome (WGS) sequencing, have started to be integrated in the clinical arena, we sought to survey health care professionals who are likely to be involved in the implementation process now and/or in the future (e.g., genetic counselors, geneticists and nurse practitioners). Two hundred twenty-one genetic counselors— one third of whom currently offer WES/WGS—participated in an anonymous online survey. The aims of the survey were first, to identify barriers to the implementation of WES/WGS, as perceived by survey participants; second, to provide the first systematic report of current practices regarding the integration of WES/WGS in clinic and/or research across the US and Canada and to illuminate the roles and challenges of genetic counselors participating in this process; and third to evaluate the impact of WES/WGS on patient care. Our results showed that genetic counseling practices with respect to WES/WGS are consistent with the criteria set forth in the ACMG 2012 policy statement, which highlights indications for testing, reporting, and pre/post test considerations. Our respondents described challenges related to offering WES/WGS, which included billing issues, the duration and content of the consent process, result interpretation and disclosure of incidental findings and variants of unknown significance. In addition, respondents indicated that specialty area (i.e., prenatal and cancer), lack of clinical utility of WES/WGS and concerns about interpretation of test results were factors that prevented them from offering this technology to patients. Finally, study participants identified the aspects of their professional training which have been most beneficial in aiding with the integration of WES/WGS into the clinical setting (molecular/clinical genetics, counseling and bioethics) and suggested that counseling aids (to assist them when explaining aspects of these tests to patients) and webinars focused on WES/WGS (for genetic counselors and other health care professionals) would be useful educational tools. Future research should permit us to further enhance our knowledge of pitfalls and benefits associated with the introduction of these powerful technologies in patient care and to further explore the roles and opportunities for genetic counselors in this rapidly evolving field.     

Cancer Risk Assessment Using Genetic Panel Testing: Considerations for Clinical Application

With the completion of the Human Genome Project and the development of high throughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, the use of multiplex genetic testing, in which multiple genes are sequenced simultaneously to test for one or more conditions, is growing rapidly. Reflecting underlying heterogeneity where a broad range of genes confer risks for one or more cancers, the development of genetic cancer panels to assess these risks represents just one example of how multiplex testing is being applied clinically. There are a number of issues and challenges to consider when conducting genetic testing for cancer risk assessment, and these issues become exceedingly more complex when moving from the traditional single-gene approach to panel testing. Here, we address the practical considerations for clinical use of panel testing for breast, ovarian, and colon cancers, including the benefits, limitations and challenges, genetic counseling issues, and management guidelines.     

A Genetic Counselor’s Guide to Using Next-Generation Sequencing in Clinical Practice

Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) and rapid reductions in cost have increased the use of such technologies in research and clinical practice. However, many barriers exist to translating NGS for routine clinical use, including issues related to the interpretation of results, and the potential to find results that are secondary or incidental to the specific application of NGS. Nonetheless, NGS has become sufficiently affordable to be offered by several clinical laboratories, and increasingly it is becoming an attractive and viable option for clinicians and patients. This article reviews current NGS technologies, highlighting the information genetic counselors need to know to make informed-decisions about utilizing NGS in the clinic, and underscoring the impact of this new testing modality on the practice of genetic counseling.     

Review of Commercially Available Epilepsy Genetic Panels

Next generation sequencing panels have revolutionized the diagnostic approach to patients with epilepsy. There are several commercial epilepsy panels available. We assessed the list of genes tested and consent forms for epilepsy panels available at seven laboratories. The panels varied in the number of genes included (70–465 genes). In some panels, genes not currently associated with epilepsy were included (up to 4 % of panel content). The panels also included genes for lysosomal storage disorders (6–12 %), congenital disorders of glycosylation (0–8.5 %), metabolic disorders (3.5–34 %), neurological syndromes (18–43 %) and multisystemic genetic syndromes (6.4–21 %). Informed consents differed significantly between laboratories ranging from basic information about genetic testing and possible results to information about insurance, genetic counseling and familial testing, and incidental findings.Our findings suggest that it is important to consider the range of genes offered on epilepsy panels and their predicted phenotypes in an effort toward improving the informed consent process.     

Next Generation Sequencing is the Impetus for the Next Generation of Laboratory-Based Genetic Counselors

Next generation sequencing (NGS) is dramatically increasing the number of clinically available genetic tests and thus the number of patients in which such testing may be indicated. The complex nature and volume of the reported results requires professional interpretation of the testing in order to translate and synthesize the meaning and potential benefit to patients, and genetic counselors are uniquely suited to provide this service. The increased need for genetic counselors in this role, coupled with the time required and a limited number of trained and available counselors presents a challenge to current models for making genetic testing available to patients and their healthcare providers effectively and efficiently. The employment of genetic counselors at genetic/genomic laboratories is one model to expand the resources for providing this service. In this article, we briefly review the advent of NGS and its clinical applications, examine the core skills of genetic counselors and delineate the expanding roles and responsibilities of laboratory-based genetic counselors. We also propose changes to the genetic counseling training program curriculum to account for the increasing opportunities for genetic counselors to contribute and thrive within genetic testing laboratories.     

Impact of Panel Gene Testing for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer on Patients

Recent advances in next generation sequencing have enabled panel gene testing, or simultaneous testing for mutations in multiple genes for a clinical condition. With more extensive and widespread genetic testing, there will be increased detection of genes with moderate penetrance without established clinical guidelines and of variants of uncertain significance (VUS), or genetic variants unknown to either be disease-causing or benign. This study surveyed 232 patients who underwent genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer to examine the impact of panel gene testing on psychological outcomes, patient understanding, and utilization of genetic information. The survey used standardized instruments including the Impact of Event Scale (IES), Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA), Satisfaction with Decision Instrument (SWD), Ambiguity Tolerance Scale (AT-20), genetics knowledge, and utilization of genetic test results. Study results suggested that unaffected individuals with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer who received positive results were most significantly impacted by intrusive thoughts, avoidance, and distress. However, scores were also modestly elevated among unaffected patients with a family history of breast and ovarian cancer who received VUS, highlighting the impact of ambiguous results that are frequent among patients undergoing genetic testing with large panels of genes. Potential risk factors for increased genetic testing-specific distress in this study included younger age, black or African American race, Hispanic origin, lower education level, and lower genetic knowledge and highlight the need for developing strategies to provide effective counseling and education to these communities, particularly when genetic testing utilizes gene panels that more commonly return VUS. More detailed pre-test education and counseling may help patients appreciate the probability of various types of test results and how results would be used clinically, and allow them to make more informed decisions about the type of genetic testing to select.     

The Ophthalmic Experience: Unanticipated Primary Findings in the Era of Next Generation Sequencing

Next generation sequencing (NGS) technology, with the ability to sequence many genomic regions at once, can provide clinicians with increased information, in the form of more mutations detected. Discussions on broad testing technology have largely been focused on incidental findings, or unanticipated results related to diseases beyond the primary indication for testing. By examining multiple genes that could be responsible for the patient’s presentation, however, there is also the possibility of unexpected results that are related to the reason genetic testing was ordered. We present a case study where multiple potentially causative mutations were detected using NGS technology. This case raises questions of scientific uncertainty, and has important implications for medical management and secondary studies. Clinicians and genetic counselors should be aware of the potential for increased information to affect one’s understanding of genetic risk, and the pre- and post-testing counseling process.     

Family Studies for Classification of Variants of Uncertain Classification: Current Laboratory Clinical Practice and a New Web-Based Educational Tool

Multi-gene cancer panels often identify variants of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) that pose a challenge to health care providers in managing a patient’s cancer risk. Family segregation analysis can yield powerful data to re-classify a VUS (as either benign or pathogenic). However, financial and personnel resources to coordinate these studies are limited. In an informal assessment we found that family studies for variant classification are done by most clinical genetics laboratories that offer hereditary cancer panel testing. The process for family studies differs substantially across laboratories. One near universal limitation is that families usually have too few individuals for an informative co-segregation analysis. A unique and potential resource-saving approach is to engage patients and their families in expanding their own pedigrees for segregation analysis of their VUS. We describe a novel public educational tool (FindMyVariant.org) designed to inform patients and genetic counselors about strategies to improve the probability of variant classification using familial segregation. While the web tool is designed to be useful for any gene, the project was primarily focused on VUS’s returned in cancer risk genes. FindMyVariant.org is a resource for genetic providers to offer motivated families who are willing to gather information about their family relationships and history. Working alongside clinical or research genetic laboratories, the information they collect may help reclassify their VUS using segregation analysis.     

An Investigation of Genetic Counselors’ Testing Recommendations: Pedigree Analysis and the Use of Multiplex Breast Cancer Panel Testing

Genetic testing recommendations for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer involve pedigree analysis and consultation of testing guidelines. The testing landscape for hereditary cancer syndromes is shifting as multiplex panel tests become more widely integrated into clinical practice. The purpose of the current study was to assess how genetic counselors utilize pedigrees to make recommendations for genetic testing, to determine consistency of these recommendations with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines and to explore current use of multiplex panel testing. Sixty-nine genetic counselors were recruited through the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cancer Special Interest Group’s Discussion Forum. Participation involved pedigree analysis and completion of an online questionnaire assessing testing recommendations and use of multiplex panel testing. Pedigree analysis and test recommendations were scored for consistency with NCCN guidelines. The average score was 12.83/15 indicating strong consistency with NCCN guidelines. Participants were more likely to consider multiplex testing when pedigrees demonstrated highly penetrant dominant inheritance but were not indicative of a particular syndrome. Participant concerns about multiplex panel testing include limited guidelines for both testing eligibility and medical management. This study demonstrates high utilization of pedigree analysis and raises new questions about its use in multiplex genetic testing.     

Development of a Communication Aid to Facilitate Risk Communication in Consultations with Unaffected Women from High Risk Breast Cancer Families: A Pilot Study

The literature on risk perception in women from high-risk breast cancer families reveals persistent over-estimation of risk, even after counseling. In this study, a communication aid was designed to facilitate discussion of risk between clinical geneticists and genetic counselors and women from this high-risk population. Method: Stage 1. The aid was developed by an expert panel of clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, psychologists, an epidemiologist, an oncologist, linguists and a consumer. It was guided by the international literature on risk communication and a large multi-centre Australian study of risk communication. The 13 page full-color communication aid used varying formats of words, numbers, graphs and pie-charts to address (a) the woman’s subjective risk; (b) the population risk of breast cancer; c) the risk of inherited breast cancer; (d) the cumulative risk for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations; (e) family risk factors; (f) the woman’s suitability for genetic testing; (h) screening and management recommendations, and (i) a re-assessment of the woman’s subjective risk. Stage 2: A before–after pilot study of 38 women who were unaffected with breast cancer and were attending four Australian familial cancer clinics was undertaken. Baseline and follow-up questionnaires were completed by 27 women. Outcomes were compared to those observed in 107 similar women undergoing genetic counseling without the communication aid in 2001. Results: The risk communication aid appears to be beneficial; breast cancer genetics knowledge improved in some areas and importantly, risk perceptions improved in the cohort receiving the communication aid. Psychological measures showed no difference in anxiety or depression between the group receiving the communication aid and the comparison cohort. Women and clinicians were very positive about the usefulness of the communication aid as an adjunct to the genetic counseling consultation.     

Risk Assessment and Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

These cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial and ethical implications of identifying at-risk individuals for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through cancer risk assessment, with or without genetic susceptibility testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment as well as the professional expertise of genetic counselors with significant experience in education and counseling regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Critical components of the process include the ascertainment of medical and family histories, determination and communication of cancer risk, assessment of risk perception, education regarding the genetics of HBOC, discussion of molecular testing for HBOC if appropriate (including benefits, risks and limitations) and any necessary follow-up. These recommendations do not dictate an exclusive course of management or guarantee a specific outcome. Moreover, they do not replace the professional judgment of a health care provider based on the clinical situation of a client.     

Acceptability of,and Information Needs Regarding,Next-Generation Sequencing in People Tested for Hereditary Cancer: A Qualitative Study

Next generation sequencing (NGS) for patients at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes can also identify non-cancer related mutations, as well as variants of unknown significance. This study aimed to determine what benefits and shortcomings patients perceive in relation to NGS, as well as their interest and information preferences in regards to such testing. Eligible patients had previously received inconclusive results from clinical mutation testing for cancer susceptibility. Semi-structured telephone interviews were subjected to qualitative analysis guided by the approach developed by Miles and Huberman. The majority of the 19 participants reported they would be interested in panel/genomic testing. Advantages identified included that it would enable better preparation and allow implementation of individualized preventative strategies, with few disadvantages mentioned. Almost all participants said they would want all results, not just those related to their previous diagnosis. Participants felt that a face-to-face discussion supplemented by an information booklet would be the best way to convey information and achieve informed consent. All participants wanted their information stored and reviewed in accordance with new developments. Although the findings indicate strong interest among these individuals, it seems that the consent process, and the interpretation and communication of results will be areas that will require revision to meet the needs of patients.     

Assessment of the Use and Feasibility of Video to Supplement the Genetic Counseling Process: A Cancer Genetic Counseling Perspective

Cancer genetic counselors use a variety of teaching modalities for patient education. This survey of cancer genetic counselors assessed their use of educational videos and their recommendations for content of future videos. Thirty percent of respondents use videos for patient education. Cited benefits included reinforcement of information for clients and increased counselor efficiency. Of the 70% who do not use videos, predominant barriers included the perceived lack of an appropriate video, lack of space and/or equipment, and concern that videos are impersonal. Most respondents desired a video that is representative of the genetic counseling session, but emphasized the importance of using broad information. Content considered critical included the pros and cons of genetic testing, associated psychosocial implications, and genetic discrimination. The results of this exploratory study provide data relevant for the development of a cancer genetics video for patient education, and suggestions are made based on aspects of information processing and communication theories.     

Implementing a Virtual Health Telemedicine Program in a Community Setting

Aurora Health Care in eastern Wisconsin has a clinical genetics program driven by genetic counselors in the cancer/adult and prenatal genetics settings. In 2015, the workforce shortage of genetic counselors left us with 4 open positions for genetic counselors that we were unable to fill. We explored many models of alternative service delivery, and determined virtual health (VH) via telemedicine to be the best option for our system. Historically, telemedicine technologies have been used to provide access to healthcare services to patients in remote areas. We, however, were struggling to find genetics counselors to staff both our remote clinics and urban clinics. To solve this problem, we recruited genetic counselors from across the country to work remotely from their current home or home office utilizing VH to staff our clinics. We then created clinical workflows and an implementation process of virtual health for 9 prenatal and cancer clinics across the eastern Wisconsin footprint of our healthcare system over the course of 12 months. Here we provide our experience and process in establishing a VH program in order to help other institutions that have been affected by the workforce shortage of clinical genetics professionals.     

Communication of Psychiatric Risk in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome: A Pilot Project

Individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) have an increased chance of developing a psychiatric disorder. While parents of children affected by 22q11.2DS typically receive counseling about risk for non-psychiatric health concerns, genetic counselors may be reluctant to discuss psychiatric risk. Further education of genetic counselors may be necessary to encourage discussion of psychiatric risk with these families. The goal of this project was to develop recommendations for genetic counselors to provide psychiatric risk information to families affected by 22q11.2DS. The recommendations were developed by synthesizing resources in the literature about risk communication. These recommendations were refined following an online focus group meeting with five health care professionals who were recruited for participation from 22q11.2DS clinics across the U.S.A. The focus group data revealed three themes related to discussion of psychiatric risk: 1) Stepwise approach, 2) Discussing treatment options and reducing risks, and 3) Addressing stigma. These recommendations may be used as a foundation for a future clinical protocol to encourage discussion about the risk for psychiatric illness at an earlier point in the diagnostic process for 22q11.2DS and to provide improved information, support and resources to affected families.