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.     

Collaboration of Colorado Cancer Genetic Counselors to Integrate Next Generation Sequencing Panels into Clinical Practice

The recent introduction of clinically available next generation sequencing (NGS) cancer panels has presented new challenges for genetic counselors. Determining which patients are appropriate for NGS panel testing is complex. Due to the large number of genes included in the NGS panels, thorough and appropriate pre-test counseling and interpretation of NGS results can be a time-consuming and difficult process. Many of the genes associated with increased cancer risk lack published clinical management guidelines and estimates of cancer risk for individuals with deleterious mutations. In order to efficiently and effectively review the clinical utility of NGS panels, Colorado cancer genetic counselors formed a working group to gain a better understanding of the genes included in NGS cancer panels. This publication reports on the approach of this group, the process used to evaluate a selected NGS panel, future directions for this collaboration, and ideas for other genetic counselors to form similar groups to efficiently evaluate new technologies and improve practice.     

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 Counseling Practice in Next Generation Sequencing Research: Implications for the Ethical Oversight of the Informed Consent Process

The potential for next generation sequencing research (NGS) to generate individual genetic results could have implications for the informed consent process and the provision of genetic counseling. We undertook a content analysis of informed consent templates and guidelines produced by Canadian institutional review boards, purposively sampling documents used by researchers to obtain consent from participants in genetics studies. Our goal was to examine the extent to which the informed consent documents addressed genetic counseling and the return of individual genetic results. Our analysis reveals that the majority of informed consent documents did not mention genetic counseling while several did not mention the return of results. We found differences in the ways in which documents addressed availability of counseling, eligibility criteria for referral to a genetic counselor, genetic counselor involvement, provision of services to family members of participants and incidental findings. From an ethical standpoint, consent documents should provide appropriate information so that participants may make an informed decision about their participation in research. The need to ensure adequate counseling for study populations in an NGS research context will necessarily involve adapting values that underlie care in genetic counseling practice. If the interests of research participants are to be truly promoted, the drafting and review of informed consent documents should give proper due to genetic counseling.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Clinical and Counseling Experiences of Early Adopters of Whole Exome Sequencing

Currently, there are limited data regarding the practice of genetic counseling for whole exome sequencing (WES). Improved understanding of how genetic counselors and other providers are educating, counseling, and communicating results may identify practice trends, and patient or provider needs. Between April 2013 and December 2014, we surveyed providers who ordered WES testing from GeneDx, a CLIA-certified laboratory. Forty-nine respondents completed the survey; 41 % of participants reported board certification in genetic counseling. Pre-test and post-test counseling was completed in all but one case each. Pre-test counseling lasted less than 1 h for 53 % of cases and 1 to 2 h for 43 %. Topics discussed with all patients included consent for testing, and incidental findings; other topics were variable. In contrast to pre-test counseling, 59 % reported post-test counseling lasting 1 to 2 h and 33 % less than an hour; post-testing counseling was significantly longer in cases with a definitive diagnosis than those without (p?=?0.0129). The survey findings indicate some variability regarding the amount of time spent on counseling and the topics discussed during pre-test counseling. Additional exploration, patient and provider educational resources, and potentially more specific guidelines regarding counseling for WES may be warranted.     

A Qualitative Study of Healthcare Providers’ Perspectives on the Implications of Genome-Wide Testing in Pediatric Clinical Practice

The utilization of genome-wide chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in pediatric clinical practice provides an opportunity to consider how genetic diagnostics is evolving, and to prepare for the clinical integration of genome-wide sequencing technologies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 healthcare providers (7 genetic counselors, 4 medical geneticists, and 4 non-genetics providers) to investigate the impact of CMA on clinical practice, and implications for providers, patients and families. Interviews were analyzed qualitatively using content analysis. Most providers reported that genomic testing enhanced their professional experience and was beneficial to patients, primarily due to the improved diagnostic rate compared with earlier chromosomal studies. Other effects on practice included moving towards genotype-first diagnosis and broadening indications for chromosomal testing. Opinions varied concerning informed consent and disclosure of results. The duty to disclose incidental findings (IFs) was noted; however concerns were raised about potential psychosocial harms of disclosing pre-symptomatic findings. Tensions were revealed between the need for comprehensive informed consent for all families and the challenges of communicating time-consuming and potentially anxiety-provoking information regarding uncertain and incidental findings that may be relevant only in rare cases. Genetic counselors can play an important role in liaising with families, health professionals and testing laboratories, providing education and guidance to non-genetics providers, and enabling families to receive adequate pre-and post-test information and follow-up care.     

Reciprocal within-day associations between incidental affect and exercise: An EMA study

Previous research suggests that how people feel throughout the course of a day (i.e. incidental affect) is predictive of exercise behaviour. A mostly separate literature suggests that exercise can lead to more positive incidental affect.

Objective: This study examines the potential reciprocal effects of incidental affect and exercise behaviour within the same day.

Design: Fifty-nine low-active (exercise <60 min/week), overweight (BMI: 25.0–39.9) adults (ages 18–65) participated in a six-month print-based exercise promotion programme.

Main outcome measures: Ecological momentary assessment was used to record self-reported exercise sessions in real time and incidental affective valence (feeling good/bad) as assessed by the 11-point Feeling Scale at random times throughout the day.

Results: Use of a within-subjects cross-lagged, autoregressive model showed that participants were more likely to exercise on days when they experienced more positive incidental affect earlier in the day (b = .58, SE = .10, p < .01), and participants were more likely to experience more positive incidental affect on days when they had exercised (b = .26, SE = .03, p < .01), with the former association significantly stronger than the latter (t = 23.54, p < .01).

Conclusion: The findings suggest a positive feedback loop whereby feeling good and exercising are reciprocally influential within the course of a day.     

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.     

An Exploration of Trainees’ Perception of Clinical Psychology Training in India: A Qualitative Analysis

This study explored trainees’ perception of clinical psychology training in India. A sample of 20 (18 females; 2 males; Mean age?=?25 years) clinical psychology trainees participated in the study following written informed consent. Participants were interviewed individually (40–50 min) using a semi-structured interview schedule developed for the study. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Broader themes were identified using principles of content analysis. The findings indicated trainees’ great enthusiasm about practical training, supervisor supervision and hospital based training. Results also showed poor recognition of the role of research and theory in training, unilateral view of supervision, poor perception of secondary goals and components of training and limited awareness about variety of clinical material. The results are indicative of trainees’ preference of clinical component of training over theory and research components of training, the backbone of prevailing systems of training globally. The preliminary findings suggest the need for further research in this area.     

Perspectives on Genetic Testing and Return of Results from the First Cohort of Presymptomatically Tested Individuals At Risk of Huntington Disease

This qualitative study gathered opinions about genetic testing from people who received presymptomatic testing for Huntington’s disease (HD) 20–30 years ago and have lived with the implications of that testing for decades. During the last section of a semi-structured interview, participants were asked open-ended questions about their opinions on the importance of autonomy in the decision to be tested for HD, whether a formal HD testing protocol is necessary, whether physician ordering for HD is acceptable without a formal protocol, whether online direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing for HD is acceptable, and whether incidental/secondary findings should be returned in the context of whole exome/genome sequencing. Most—but not all—participants were in favor of an individual’s right to decide whether and when to pursue HD testing, use of a formal HD testing protocol, and returning medically actionable secondary findings. However, the majority of participants were opposed not only to physician ordering and DTC HD testing in the absence of a formal protocol but also to returning a secondary finding of an expanded HD allele. This study presents the opinions of a unique and extremely well-informed cohort on issues that need to be taken into careful consideration by genetic counselors and other medical professionals who are developing genetic testing protocols, making decisions about the availability of genetic tests, and making decisions about whether and how to return incidental findings.     

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.     

Comparison of Informed Consent Preferences for Multiplex Genetic Carrier Screening among a Diverse Population

Multiplex genetic carrier screening is increasingly being integrated into reproductive care. Obtaining informed consent becomes more challenging as the number of screened conditions increases. Implementing a model of generic informed consent may facilitate informed decision-making. Current Wayne State University students and staff were invited to complete a web-based survey by blast email solicitation. Participants were asked to determine which of two generic informed consent scenarios they preferred: a brief versus a detailed consent. They were asked to rank the importance of different informational components in making an informed decision and to provide demographic information. Comparisons between informational preferences, demographic variables and scenario preferences were made. Six hundred ninety three participants completed the survey. When evaluating these generic consents, the majority preferred the more detailed consent (74.5 %), and agreed that it provided enough information to make an informed decision (89.5 %). Those who thought it would be more important to know the severity of the conditions being screened (p?=?.002) and range of symptoms (p?=?.000) were more likely to prefer the more detailed consent. There were no significant associations between scenario preferences and demographic variables. A generic consent was perceived to provide sufficient information for informed decision making regarding multiplex carrier screening with most preferring a more detailed version of the consent. Individual attitudes rather than demographic variables influenced preferences regarding the amount of information that should be included in the generic consent. The findings have implications for how clinicians approach providing tailored informed consent.     

Academic Guidance in Medical Student Research: How Well Do Supervisors and Students Understand the Ethics of Human Research?

Research is increasingly recognised as a key component of medical curricula, offering a range of benefits including development of skills in evidence-based medicine. The literature indicates that experienced academic supervision or mentoring is important in any research activity and positively influences research output. The aim of this project was to investigate the human research ethics experiences and knowledge of three groups: medical students, and university academic staff and clinicians eligible to supervise medical student research projects; at two Australian universities. Training in research ethics was low amongst academic staff and clinicians eligible to supervise medical student research. Only two-thirds of academic staff (67.9 %) and students (65.7 %) and less than half of clinicians surveyed (47.1 %; p?=?0.014) indicated that specific patient consent was required for a doctor to include patient medical records within a research publication. There was limited awareness of requirements for participant information and consent forms amongst all groups. In the case of clinical trials, fewer clinicians (88.4 %) and students (83.3 %) than academics (100 %) indicated there was a requirement to obtain consent (p?=?0.009). Awareness of the ethics committee focus on respect was low across all groups. This project has identified significant gaps in human research ethics understanding among medical students, and university academic staff and clinicians. The incorporation of research within medical curricula provides the impetus for medical schools and their institutions to ensure that academic staff and clinicians who are eligible and qualified to supervise students’ research projects are appropriately trained in human research ethics.     

The influence of intentional versus incidental retrieval practices on the role of recollection in test-enhanced learning

A testing effect occurs when taking a test leads to more durable memory for tested materials, relative to restudying them during the same period of time. In the current study, we examined whether incidental and intentional restudy/testing practice modes during a practice phase would modulate the contribution of recollection-based and familiarity-based retrieval in a final recognition test. Both practice strategy (restudy versus testing) and practice mode (incidental vs. intentional) were manipulated between participants (N = 160). The restudy and testing groups performed a semantic rating task and a word fragment completion task, respectively, in the incidental condition or in the intentional condition. Only those participants in the intentional condition were instructed to recall or restudy the targets. All participants went through two study–practice cycles that involved two different sets of targets. After the second cycle, participants performed a list-discrimination recognition test that could assess the contributions of recollection-based and familiarity-based retrieval on test-enhanced learning. The testing effect occurred in the intentional condition, but not in the incidental condition. Relative to intentional restudy, intentional testing boosted recollection, but not familiarity, demonstrating the role of recollection in test-enhanced learning.     

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.     

Genetic Testing of Children for Predisposition to Mood Disorders: Anticipating the Clinical Issues

Large-scale sequencing information may provide a basis for genetic tests for predisposition to common disorders. In this study, participants in the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (N?=?53) with a personal and/or family history of Major Depressive Disorder or Bipolar Disorder were interviewed based on the Health Belief Model around hypothetical intention to test one’s children for probability of developing a mood disorder. Most participants (87 %) were interested in a hypothetical test for children that had high (“90 %”) positive predictive value, while 51 % of participants remained interested in a modestly predictive test (“20 %”). Interest was driven by beliefs about effects of test results on parenting behaviors and on discrimination. Most participants favored testing before adolescence (64 %), and were reluctant to share results with asymptomatic children before adulthood. Participants anticipated both positive and negative effects of testing on parental treatment and on children’s self-esteem. Further investigation will determine whether these findings will generalize to other complex disorders for which early intervention is possible but not clearly demonstrated to improve outcomes. More information is also needed about the effects of childhood genetic testing and sharing of results on parent–child relationships, and about the role of the child in the decision-making 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.