Key result
Disclosing pathogenic ICC variants found in ~0.6% of individuals is clinically feasible and informative.
Why the study?
Evidence regarding variant-disease association and the consequences of disclosing genome sequencing secondary findings for individuals and healthcare services is limited.
Does a genotype-first approach to disclosing secondary findings in inherited cardiac conditions genes lead to clinical utility and acceptable psychosocial outcomes?
Case-Control (n=11)
Double-blind
Yes
Does a genotype-first approach to disclosing secondary findings in inherited cardiac conditions genes lead to clinical utility and acceptable psychosocial outcomes?
Disclosing secondary findings of inherited cardiac conditions from genome sequencing is feasible and valued by participants, but low uptake and variant reclassification highlight the complexities of genotype-first approaches.
SF disclosure in ICC genes is feasible via targeted evaluation; leaves open variant associations and long-term clinical/service impacts.
Disclosing secondary findings (SF) from genome sequencing (GS) can alert carriers to disease risk. However, evidence around variant-disease association and consequences of disclosure for individuals and healthcare services is limited. We report on the feasibility of an approach to identification of SF in inherited cardiac conditions (ICC) genes in participants in a rare disease GS study, followed by targeted clinical evaluation. Qualitative methods were used to explore behavioural and psychosocial consequences of disclosure. ICC genes were analysed in genome sequence data from 7203 research participants; a two-stage approach was used to recruit genotype-blind variant carriers and matched controls. Cardiac-focused medical and family history collection and genetic counselling were followed by standard clinical tests, blinded to genotype. Pathogenic ICC variants were identified in 0.61% of individuals; 20 were eligible for the present study. Four variant carriers and seven non-carrier controls participated. One variant carrier had a family history of ICC and was clinically affected; a second was clinically unaffected and had no relevant family history. One variant, in two unrelated participants, was subsequently reclassified as being of uncertain significance. Analysis of qualitative data highlights participant satisfaction with approach, willingness to follow clinical recommendations, but variable outcomes of relatives' engagement with healthcare services. In conclusion, when offered access to SF, many people choose not to pursue them. For others, disclosure of ICC SF in a specialist setting is valued and of likely clinical utility, and can be expected to identify individuals with, and without a phenotype.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ormondroyd et al. (2020) conducted a case-control in Inherited cardiac conditions (ICC) (n=11). Disclosure of secondary findings in inherited cardiac conditions genes vs. Non-carrier controls was evaluated on Identification of pathogenic ICC variants in the genome sequencing cohort. Pathogenic inherited cardiac condition variants were identified in 0.61% of 7,203 individuals, and targeted clinical evaluation demonstrated that disclosure is feasible and identifies both affected and unaffected individuals.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: