Search

Efforts to implement and evaluate genome sequencing (GS) as a screening tool for newborns and infants are expanding worldwide. The first iteration of the BabySeq Project (2015-2019), a randomized controlled trial of newborn sequencing, produced novel evidence on medical, behavioral, and economic outcomes. The second iteration of BabySeq, which began participant recruitment in January 2023, examines GS outcomes in a larger, more diverse cohort of more than 500 infants up to one year of age recruited from pediatric clinics at several sites across the United States. The trial aims for families who self-identify as Black/African American or Hispanic/Latino to make up more than 50% of final enrollment, and key aspects of the trial design were co-developed with a community advisory board. All enrolled families receive genetic counseling and a family history report. Half of enrolled infants are randomized to receive GS with comprehensive interpretation of pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants in more than 4,300 genes associated with childhood-onset and actionable adult-onset conditions, as well as larger-scale chromosomal copy number variants classified as pathogenic or likely pathogenic. GS result reports include variants associated with disease (Mendelian disease risks) and carrier status of autosomal-recessive and X-linked disorders. Investigators evaluate the utility and impacts of implementing a GS screening program in a diverse cohort of infants using medical record review and longitudinal parent surveys. In this perspective, we describe the rationale for the second iteration of the BabySeq Project, the outcomes being assessed, and the key decisions collaboratively made by the study team and community advisory board., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests H.S.S. has received consulting income from Illumina unrelated to this work. N.D.S. is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for Neuberg Center for Genomic Medicine. A.L.M. is a paid advisor for Nurture Genomics. B.R.K. is a member of medical advisory boards for Alexion, SpringWorks, Healx, Infixion, and Recursion and has stock options in GenomeMedical. R.C.G. has received compensation for advising Allelica, Atria, Fabric, Genome Web, and Genomic Life and is a cofounder of Genome Medical and Nurture Genomics., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Elective genomic testing (EGT) is increasingly available clinically. Limited real-world evidence exists about attitudes and knowledge of EGT recipients., Methods: After web-based education, patients who enrolled in an EGT program at a rural nonprofit health care system completed a survey that assessed attitudes, knowledge, and risk perceptions., Results: From August 2020 to April 2022, 5920 patients completed the survey and received testing. Patients most frequently cited interest in learning their personal disease risks as their primary motivation. Patients most often expected results to guide medication management (74.0%), prevent future disease (70.4%), and provide information about risks to offspring (65.4%). Patients were "very concerned" most frequently about the privacy of genetic information (19.8%) and how well testing predicted disease risks (18.0%). On average, patients answered 6.7 of 11 knowledge items correctly (61.3%). They more often rated their risks for colon and breast cancers as lower rather than higher than the average person but more often rated their risk for a heart attack as higher rather than lower than the average person (all P < .001)., Conclusion: Patients pursued EGT because of the utility expectations but often misunderstood the test's capabilities., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Robert C. Green, Kurt D. Christensen, Emilie S. Zoltick, Madison R. Hickingbotham, Jessica L. LeBlanc, and Lauren N. Galbraith were supported by a research grant from Sanford Health. Madison R. Hickingbotham, Madison R. Hickingbotham, Ann Chen Wu, Lauren N. Galbraith, and Jessica L. LeBlanc have been funded by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), and National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). Ann Chen Wu has received grants from NICHD, NHLBI, and GlaxoSmithKline. Catherine Hajek is an employee of Helix OpCo. Christine Y. Lu undertook contract work with Illumina Inc outside the submitted work and has received research grants and contracts from National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), NIMH, NICHD, National Cancer Institute, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emilie S. Zoltick has been funded by NIMHD. Hadley Stevens Smith has been funded by NHGRI and NICHD, has consulted for Illumina, Inc and received compensation, and has received compensation from Elsevier and the Eastern Society of Pediatric Research. Kurt D. Christensen has received research grants from NHGRI, NCATS, NHLBI, and NICHD. Lauren N. Galbraith is an employee of Pfizer, Inc. Robert C. Green has received compensation for advising the following companies: AIA, Allelica, Atria, Fabric, Genome Web, Genomic Life, Verily, and VinBigData; is cofounder of Genome Medical and Nurture Genomics; and has received research grants from NCATS, NHLBI, the Danaher Foundation, the Southcentral Foundation, GRAIL, and Beaumont Health. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Genetic testing of patients with neurodevelopmental disabilities (NDDs) is critical for diagnosis, medical management, and access to precision therapies. Because genetic testing approaches evolve rapidly, professional society practice guidelines serve an essential role in guiding clinical care; however, several challenges exist regarding the creation and equitable implementation of these guidelines. In this scoping review, we assessed the current state of United States professional societies' guidelines pertaining to genetic testing for unexplained global developmental delay, intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, and cerebral palsy. We describe several identified shortcomings and argue the need for a unified, frequently updated, and easily-accessible cross-specialty society guideline. ANN NEUROL 2024., (© 2024 The Author(s). Annals of Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Neurological Association.)

Background: The growing demand for genomic testing and limited access to experts necessitate innovative service models. While chatbots have shown promise in supporting genomic services like pre-test counseling, their use in returning positive genetic results, especially using the more recent large language models (LLMs) remains unexplored., Objective: This study reports the prompt engineering process and intrinsic evaluation of the LLM component of a chatbot designed to support returning positive population-wide genomic screening results., Methods: We used a three-step prompt engineering process, including Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and few-shot techniques to develop an open-response chatbot. This was then evaluated using two hypothetical scenarios, with experts rating its performance using a 5-point Likert scale across eight criteria: tone, clarity, program accuracy, domain accuracy, robustness, efficiency, boundaries, and usability., Results: The chatbot achieved an overall score of 3.88 out of 5 across all criteria and scenarios. The highest ratings were in Tone (4.25), Usability (4.25), and Boundary management (4.0), followed by Efficiency (3.88), Clarity and Robustness (3.81), and Domain Accuracy (3.63). The lowest-rated criterion was Program Accuracy, which scored 3.25., Discussion: The LLM handled open-ended queries and maintained boundaries, while the lower Program Accuracy rating indicates areas for improvement. Future work will focus on refining prompts, expanding evaluations, and exploring optimal hybrid chatbot designs that integrate LLM components with rule-based chatbot components to enhance genomic service delivery.

Purpose: As population-based screening programs to identify genetic conditions in adults using genomic sequencing (GS) are increasingly available, validated patient-centered outcome measures are needed to understand participants' experience. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument to assess the perceived utility of GS in the context of adult screening., Methods: Informed by a 5-domain conceptual model, we used a 5-step approach to instrument development and validation: (1) item writing, (2) cognitive testing, (3) pilot testing and item reduction, (4) psychometric testing, and (5) evaluation of construct validity. Adults undergoing risk-based or population-based GS who had received GS results as part of ongoing research studies participated in structured cognitive interviews and 2 rounds of surveys. After item pool refinement, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis and calculated Pearson correlations with related instruments., Results: We derived the 18-item Adult Screening version of the GENEtic Utility scale (total sum score α = .87). Mirroring the Pediatric Diagnostic version, the instrument has a 2-factor structure, including an Informational Utility subscale (14 items, α = .89) and an Emotional Utility subscale (4 items, α = .75). The Informational Utility subscale was strongly associated with empowerment and personal utility of GS. Correlations of the Emotional Utility subscale with psychosocial impact and anxiety and depression were weak to moderate., Conclusion: Initial psychometric testing of the Adult Screening GENEtic Utility scale demonstrates its promise, and additional validation in translational genomics research is warranted., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr Smith’s work has been funded by the NIH. She has received compensation as a consultant for Illumina, Inc and RTI International, unrelated to this work. Mr Buchanan has an equity stake in MeTree, Inc and You, Inc, unrelated to this work. Dr McGuire is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for Nurture Genomics. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Measuring the effects of genomic sequencing (GS) on patients and families is critical for translational research. We aimed to develop and validate an instrument to assess parents' perceived utility of pediatric diagnostic GS., Methods: Informed by a 5-domain conceptual model, the study comprised 5 steps: (1) item writing, (2) cognitive testing, (3) pilot testing and item reduction, (4) psychometric testing, and (5) evaluation of construct validity. Parents of pediatric patients who had received results of clinically indicated GS participated in structured cognitive interviews and 2 rounds of surveys. After eliminating items based on theory and quantitative performance, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis and calculated Pearson correlations with related instruments., Results: We derived the 21-item Pediatric Diagnostic version of the GENEtic Utility (GENE-U) scale, which has a 2-factor structure that includes an Informational Utility subscale (16 items, α = 0.91) and an Emotional Utility subscale (5 items, α = 0.71). Scores can be summed to calculate a Total scale score (α = 0.87). The Informational Utility subscale was strongly associated with empowerment and personal utility of GS, and the Emotional Utility subscale was moderately associated with psychosocial impact and depression and anxiety., Conclusion: The pediatric diagnostic GENE-U scale demonstrated good psychometric performance in this initial evaluation and could be a useful tool for translational genomics researchers, warranting additional validation., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Hadley Stevens Smith’s work has been funded by the NIH. She has received compensation as a consultant for Illumina, Inc unrelated to this work. Amy L. McGuire is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for Nurture Genomics. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Professional guidelines recommend engaging adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in medical decision making (DM), including whether to undergo genomic sequencing (GS). We explored DM around GS and attitudes after return of GS results among a diverse group of AYAs with cancer and their parents., Methods: We surveyed AYAs with cancer (n = 75) and their parents (n = 52) 6 months after receiving GS results through the Texas KidsCanSeq study. We analyzed AYAs' DM role in GS research enrollment and their satisfaction with that role. We compared AYAs' and parents' self-reported understanding of, attitudes toward, and perceived utility of the AYA's GS results., Results: Most AYAs reported equally sharing DM with their parents (55%) or leading DM (36%) about GS research. Compared with their cancer care DM role, 56% of AYAs reported the same level of involvement in GS research DM, whereas 32% were more involved, and 13% were less involved (P = .011). AYAs were satisfied (99%) with their DM role regarding GS study participation. AYAs and parents had similar self-reported understanding of, attitudes toward, and perceived utility of the GS results., Conclusion: Our results support engaging AYAs in DM about GS research and provide insights into AYAs' DM preferences and positive attitudes toward GS., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Sharon E. Plon is a member of the scientific advisory panel of Baylor Genetics Laboratories. Hadley S. Smith has received consulting income from Illumina, Inc unrelated to this work. The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Many genetic conditions present in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), where a diagnostic evaluation is pursued. However, understanding of the impact of a genetic diagnosis on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life for these infants remains incomplete. We therefore evaluated parent-reported outcomes complemented by clinical outcomes measures over one year for a cohort of infants in the NICU undergoing genetic evaluation., Methods: Prospective cohort study evaluating outcomes after genetics consultation in a level IV NICU via parent-report and electronic medical records (EMR) review. Eligible infants were genetically undiagnosed at enrollment. Parent surveys were administered at baseline and three, six-, and 12-months following enrollment and assessed genetic testing utility as well as parent-reported infant health-related quality of life using the Infant Toddler Quality of Life Questionnaire., Results: 110 infant-parent pairs were enrolled. Infants had a median age at enrollment of 15 days (interquartile range 8-37.75). At baseline, 74% (81/110) of parents endorsed high importance of finding a genetic diagnosis, but perceived importance significantly decreased over time. Over the study period, 38 infants received a molecular diagnosis per parent report, though this was discordant with EMR review. Identification of a diagnosis did not significantly impact health-related quality of life across most domains, which was lower overall than population norms., Conclusions: A genetic diagnosis is highly desired by parents in the NICU, though waning interest over time for undiagnosed families may reflect parental emotional adaptation and acceptance. Additional supports are needed to improve perceived quality of life., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Disclosures: MH Wojcik has consulted for Illumina and Sanofi and HS Smith has received consulting income from Illumina, all unrelated to this work.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a significant health issue, with notable incidence rates in Norway. The immune response plays a dual role in CRC, offering both protective effects and promoting tumor growth. This research aims to provide a detailed screening of immune-related genes and identify specific genes in CRC and adenomatous polyps within the Norwegian population, potentially serving as detection biomarkers., Methods: The study involved 69 patients (228 biopsies) undergoing colonoscopy, divided into CRC, adenomatous polyps, and control groups. We examined the expression of 579 immune genes through nCounter analysis emphasizing differential expression in tumor versus adjacent non-tumorous tissue and performed quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) across patient categories., Results: Key findings include the elevated expression of CXCL1, CXCL2, IL1B, IL6, CXCL8 (IL8), PTGS2, and SPP1 in CRC tissues. Additionally, CXCL1, CXCL2, IL6, CXCL8, and PTGS2 showed significant expression changes in adenomatous polyps, suggesting their early involvement in carcinogenesis., Conclusions: This study uncovers a distinctive immunological signature in colorectal neoplasia among Norwegians, highlighting CXCL1, CXCL2, IL1B, IL6, CXCL8, PTGS2, and SPP1 as potential CRC biomarkers. These findings warrant further research to confirm their role and explore their utility in non-invasive screening strategies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Omran, Tunsjø, Jahanlu, Brackmann, Bemanian and Sæther.)

Purpose: Measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of children with suspected genetic conditions is important for understanding the effect of interventions such as genomic sequencing (GS). The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) is a widely used generic measure of HRQoL in pediatric patients, but its psychometric properties have not yet been evaluated in children undergoing diagnostic GS., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed caregivers at the time of their child's enrollment into GS research studies as part of the Clinical Sequencing Evidence Generating Research (CSER) consortium. To evaluate structural validity of the PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scales and PedsQL Infant Scales parent proxy-report versions, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis of the hypothesized factor structure. To evaluate convergent validity, we examined correlations between caregivers' reports of their child's health, assessed using the EQ VAS, and PedsQL scores by child age. We conducted linear regression analyses to examine whether age moderated the association between caregiver-reported child health and PedsQL scores. We assessed reliability using Cronbach's alpha., Results: We analyzed data for 766 patients across all PedsQL age group versions (1-12 months through 13-18 years). Model fit failed to meet criteria for good fit, even after modification. Neither age group (categorical) nor age (continuous) significantly moderated associations between PedsQL scores and caregiver-reported child health. Cronbach's alphas indicated satisfactory internal consistency for most PedsQL scales., Conclusion: The PedsQL Generic Core Scales and Infant Scales may be appropriate to measure HRQoL in pediatric patients with suspected genetic conditions across a wide age range. While we found evidence of acceptable internal consistency and preliminary convergent validity in this sample, there were some potential problems with structural validity and reliability that require further attention., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Despite the emerging evidence in recent years, successful implementation of clinical genomic sequencing (CGS) remains limited and is challenged by a range of barriers. These include a lack of standardized practices, limited economic assessments for specific indications, limited meaningful patient engagement in health policy decision-making, and the associated costs and resource demand for implementation. Although CGS is gradually becoming more available and accessible worldwide, large variations and disparities remain, and reflections on the lessons learned for successful implementation are sparse. In this commentary, members of the Global Economics and Evaluation of Clinical Genomics Sequencing Working Group (GEECS) describe the global landscape of CGS in the context of health economics and policy and propose evidence-based solutions to address existing and future barriers to CGS implementation. The topics discussed are reflected as two overarching themes: (1) system readiness for CGS and (2) evidence, assessments, and approval processes. These themes highlight the need for health economics, public health, and infrastructure and operational considerations; a robust patient- and family-centered evidence base on CGS outcomes; and a comprehensive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Please see ICMJE form(s) for author conflicts of interest. These have been provided as supplementary materials., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Project HOPE - The People-To-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Costs of implementing genomic testing innovations extend beyond the cost of sequencing, affecting personnel and infrastructure for which little data are available. We developed a time and motion (T&M) study within the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium to address this gap, and herein describe challenges of conducting T&M studies within a research consortium and the approaches we developed to overcome them. CSER investigators created a subgroup to carry out the T&M study (authors). We describe logistical and administrative challenges associated with resource use data collection across heterogeneous projects conducted in real-world clinical settings, and our solutions for completing this study and harmonizing data across projects. We delineate processes for feasible data collection on workflow, personnel, and resources required to deliver genetic testing innovations in each CSER project. A critical early step involved developing detailed project-specific process flow diagrams of innovation implementation in projects' clinical settings. Analyzing diagrams across sites, we identified common process-step themes, used to organize project-specific data collection and cross-project analysis. Given the heterogeneity of innovations, study design, and workflows, which affect resources required to deliver genetic testing innovations, flexibility was necessary to harmonize data collection. Despite its challenges, this heterogeneity provides rich insights about variation in clinical processes and resource implications for implementing genetic testing innovations., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Understanding research participants' responses to learning Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information is important to inform clinical implementation of precision diagnostics given rapid advances in disease modifying therapies., Objective: We assessed participants' perspectives on the meaning of their amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging results for their health, self-efficacy to understand their results, psychological impact of learning their results, experience receiving their results from the clinical team, and interest in genetic testing for AD risk., Methods: We surveyed individuals who were being clinically evaluated for AD and received PET imaging six weeks after the return of results. We analyzed responses to close-ended survey items by PET result using Fisher's exact test and qualitatively coded open-ended responses., Results: A total of 88 participants completed surveys, most of whom had mild cognitive impairment due to AD (38.6%), AD (28.4%), or were cognitively unimpaired (21.6%). Participants subjectively understood their results (25.3% strongly agreed, 41.8% agreed), which could help them plan (16.5% strongly agreed, 49.4% agreed). Participants with a negative PET result (n = 25) reported feelings of relief (Fisher's exact p < 0.001) and happiness (p < 0.001) more frequently than those with a positive result. Most participants felt that they were treated respectfully and were comfortable voicing concerns during the disclosure process. Genetic testing was anticipated to be useful for medical care decisions (48.2%) and to inform family members about AD risk (42.9%)., Conclusions: Participants had high subjective understanding and self-efficacy around their PET results and did not experience negative psychological effects. Interest in genetic testing was high.

There are approximately 400 000 children in foster care in the US, approximately one-half of whom have chronic health problems and approximately 10% of whom have complex healthcare needs. Given the increasing relevance of genomic sequencing to guide clinical care for children with rare, chronic, and undiagnosed conditions, it may be an important component of diagnostic evaluation for children in foster care. Clinically indicated genomic sequencing may provide information that has health implications for children in foster care, as well as for their biological parents and other relatives. Whether and how genomic sequencing results impact legal decision making and family court outcomes is not yet well-understood. We describe scenarios that highlight legal, ethical, and policy issues surrounding genomic sequencing for children in foster care using 3 cases adapted from real-world events. Together, these cases highlight important yet underexplored issues that arise when genomic information has legal relevance in family court and ethical implications for child and family well-being. As genomic sequencing becomes more routine for the general pediatric population, additional research is needed to better understand its impacts on children and other stakeholders within the foster care system., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no Conflicts of interest. H.S.S. is supported by a grant from the National Human Genome Research Institute (K99HG011491). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objectives: Genomic sequencing (GS) is increasingly used for diagnostic evaluation, yet follow-up care is not well understood. We assessed clinicians' recommendations after GS, parent-reported follow-up, and actions parents initiated in response to learning their child's GS results., Methods: We surveyed parents of children who received GS through the Clinical Sequencing Evidence Generating Research consortium ∼5 to 7 months after return of results. We compared the proportion of parents who reported discussing their child's result with a clinician, clinicians' recommendations, and parents' follow-up actions by GS result type using χ2 tests., Results: A total of 1188 respondents completed survey measures on recommended medical actions (n = 1187) and/or parent-initiated actions (n = 913). Most parents who completed recommended medical actions questions (n = 833, 70.3%) reported having discussed their child's GS results with clinicians. Clinicians made recommendations to change current care for patients with positive GS results (n = 79, 39.1%) more frequently than for those with inconclusive (n = 31, 12.4%) or negative results (n = 44, 11.9%; P < .001). Many parents discussed (n = 152 completed, n = 135 planned) implications of GS results for future pregnancies with a clinician. Aside from clinical recommendations, 13.0% (n = 119) of parents initiated changes to their child's health or lifestyle., Conclusions: In diverse pediatric clinical contexts, GS results can lead to recommendations for follow-up care, but they likely do not prompt large increases in the quantity of care received., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Purpose: Cascade testing, the process of testing a proband's at-risk relatives, is integral to realizing the full value of genomic sequencing. However, there is little empirical evidence on the uptake of cascade testing after a positive exome sequencing (ES) result in a population of probands with diverse clinical indications., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed administrative data from 2 US clinical laboratories that perform ES. For each proband with a positive ES result, we used linked family data to describe the frequency of relatives' cascade testing performed at the same laboratory, variant detection yield of cascade tests, and characteristics of probands and relatives categorized on the basis of cascade testing completion., Results: Among the 3723 positive ES results across both laboratories, 426 relatives of 282 probands completed cascade testing (uptake = 7.6%). An average of 1.5 relatives (SD = 0.9) were tested per proband. Of the 426 relatives tested, 200 had a variant of interest detected (variant detection yield = 47.0%)., Conclusion: In our real-world data analysis, a small proportion of probands with a positive ES result subsequently had relatives complete cascade testing at the same laboratory. However, approximately half of the tested relatives received a clinically significant result that could have implications for clinical management or reproductive planning. Additional research on ways to increase cascade testing uptake is warranted., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest H.S.S. and H.S. declare no conflict of interest. J.S. and M.T. are salaried employees at Ambry Genetics, a Konica Minolta, Inc company. Baylor College of Medicine and Miraca Holdings Inc have formed a joint venture with shared ownership and governance of Baylor Genetics, which performs genetic testing and derives revenue. P.L. is an employee of Baylor College of Medicine and derives support through a professional services agreement with Baylor Genetics., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Families of children with rare and undiagnosed conditions face many psychosocial and logistical challenges that may affect their approach to decisions about their child's care and their family's well-being. As genomic sequencing (GS) is increasingly incorporated into pediatric diagnostic workups, assessing the family-level characteristics that shape the experience of pediatric GS is crucial to understanding how families approach decision-making about the test and how they incorporate the results into their family life. We conducted semi-structured interviews with parents and other primary caregivers of pediatric patients who were evaluated for a suspected genetic condition and who were recommended to have GS ( n = 20) or who had recently completed GS ( n = 21). We analyzed qualitative data using multiple rounds of thematic analysis. We organized our thematic findings into three domains of factors that influence the family-level experience of GS: (1) family structure and dynamics; (2) parental identity, relationships, and philosophies; and (3) social and cultural differences. Participants conceptualized their child's family in various ways, ranging from nuclear biological family to support networks made up of friends and communities. Our findings can inform the design and interpretation of preference research to advance family-level value assessment of GS as well as genetic counseling for families.

Given that pediatric genomic sequencing (GS) may have implications for the health and well-being of both the child and family, a clearer understanding of the key drivers of the utility of GS from the family perspective is needed. The purpose of this study is to explore what is important to caregivers of pediatric patients regarding clinical GS, with a focus on family-level considerations. We conducted semi-structured interviews with caregivers (n = 41) of pediatric patients who had been recommended for or completed GS that explored the scope of factors caregivers considered when deciding whether to pursue GS for their child. We analyzed the qualitative data in multiple rounds of coding using thematic analysis. Caregivers raised important family-level considerations, in addition to those specifically for their child, which included wanting the best chance at good quality of life for the family, the ability to learn about family health, the impact on the caregiver's well-being, privacy concerns among family members, and the cost of testing to the family. We developed a framework of key drivers of utility consisting of four domains that influenced caregivers' decision making: underlying values, perceived benefits, perceived risks, and other pragmatic considerations regarding GS. These findings can inform measurement approaches that better capture the utility of pediatric GS for families and improve assessments of the value of clinical GS., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Human Genetics.)

Purpose: Little is known about how Medicaid coverage policies affect access to genetic tests for pediatric patients. Building upon and extending a previous analysis of prior authorization requests (PARs), we describe expected coverage of genetic tests submitted to Texas Medicaid and the PAR and diagnostic outcomes of those tests., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed genetic tests ordered at 3 pediatric outpatient genetics clinics in Texas. We compared Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes with the Texas Medicaid fee-for-service schedule (FFSS) to determine whether tests were expected to be covered by Medicaid. We assessed completion and diagnostic yield of commonly ordered tests., Results: Among the 3388 total tests submitted to Texas Medicaid, 68.9% (n = 2336) used at least 1 CPT code that was not on the FFSS and 80.7% (n = 2735) received a favorable PAR outcome. Of the tests with a CPT code not on the FFSS, 60.0% (n = 1400) received a favorable PAR outcome and were completed and 20.5% (n = 287) were diagnostic. The diagnostic yield of all tests with a favorable PAR outcome that were completed was 18.7% (n = 380/2029)., Conclusion: Most PARs submitted to Texas Medicaid used a CPT code for which reimbursement from Texas Medicaid was not guaranteed. The frequency with which clinically indicated genetic tests were not listed on the Texas Medicaid FFSS suggests misalignment between genetic testing needs and coverage policies. Our findings can inform updates to Medicaid policies to reduce coverage uncertainty and expand access to genetic tests with high diagnostic utility., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Increasing diversity in clinical trial participation is necessary to improve health outcomes and requires addressing existing social, structural, and geographic barriers. The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium (CSER) included six research projects to enroll historically underrepresented/underserved (UR/US) populations in clinical genomics research. Delays and project re-designs emerged shortly after work began. Understanding common experiences of these projects may inform future trial implementation., Methods: Semi-structured interviews with six CSER principal investigators and seven project managers were performed. An interview guide included questions of research/clinical infrastructure, logistics across sites, language, communication, and allocation of grant-related resources. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim; transcripts were analyzed using inductive coding, thematic analysis and consensus building., Results: All projects collaborating with new clinical sub-sites to recruit UR/US populations. Refining trial logistics continued long after enrollment for all projects. Themes of challenges included: sub-site customization for workflow and genetics support, conflicting input from participant advisory groups and approval bodies, developing research personnel, complex data management structures, and external changes (e.g. subcontractors ending contracts) that required redesign. Themes of beneficial lessons included: domains with prior experience were easier, develop project champions at each sub-site, structure communication within the research team, and simplify research design when possible., Conclusions: The operational aspects of expanding clinical research into novel sub-sites are significant and require investment of time and resources. The themes arising from these interviews suggest priority areas for more quantitative analyses in the future including multi-institutional approval policies and processes, data management structures, and incremental research complexity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Routine genome-wide screening for cardiovascular disease risk may inform clinical decision-making. However, little is known about whether clinicians and patients would find such testing useful or acceptable within the context of a genomics-enabled learning health system., Methods: We conducted surveys with patients and their clinicians who were participating in the HeartCare Study, a precision cardiology care project that returned results from a next-generation sequencing panel of 158 genes associated with cardiovascular disease risk. Six weeks after return of results, we assessed patients' and clinicians' perceived utility and disutility of HeartCare, the effect of the test on clinical recommendations, and patients' attitudes toward integration of research and clinical care., Results: Among 666 HeartCare patients with a result returned during the survey study period, 42.0% completed a full or partial survey. Patient-participants who completed a full survey (n=224) generally had positive perceptions of HeartCare independent of whether they received a positive or negative result. Most patient-participants considered genetic testing for cardiovascular disease risk to have more benefit than risk (88.3%) and agreed that it provided information that they wanted to know (81.2%), while most disagreed that the test caused them to feel confused (77.7%) or overwhelmed (78.0%). For 122 of their patients with positive results, clinicians (n=13) reported making changes in clinical care for 66.4% of patients, recommending changes in health behaviors for 36.9% of patients, and recommending to 33.6% of patients that their family members have clinical testing., Conclusions: Both patients and clinicians thought the HeartCare panel screen for cardiovascular disease risk provided information that was useful in terms of personal or health benefits to the patient and that informed clinical care without causing patients to be confused or overwhelmed. Further research is needed to assess perceptions of genome-wide screening among the US cardiology clinic population.

Purpose: Methodological challenges have limited economic evaluations of genome sequencing (GS) and exome sequencing (ES). Our objective was to develop conceptual frameworks for model-based cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of diagnostic GS/ES., Methods: We conducted a scoping review of economic analyses to develop and iterate with experts a set of conceptual CEA frameworks for GS/ES for prenatal testing, early diagnosis in pediatrics, diagnosis of delayed-onset disorders in pediatrics, genetic testing in cancer, screening of newborns, and general population screening., Results: Reflecting on 57 studies meeting inclusion criteria, we recommend the following considerations for each clinical scenario. For prenatal testing, performing comparative analyses of costs of ES strategies and postpartum care, as well as genetic diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes. For early diagnosis in pediatrics, modeling quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs over ≥20 years for rapid turnaround GS/ES. For hereditary cancer syndrome testing, modeling cumulative costs and QALYs for the individual tested and first/second/third-degree relatives. For tumor profiling, not restricting to treatment uptake or response and including QALYs and costs of downstream outcomes. For screening, modeling lifetime costs and QALYs and considering consequences of low penetrance and GS/ES reanalysis., Conclusion: Our frameworks can guide the design of model-based CEAs and ultimately foster robust evidence for the economic value of GS/ES., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest K.F.M. has received institutional support from GE Healthcare. D.L.V has received institutional support from Foundation Medicine. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. All rights reserved.)

TANGO2 disorder is a rare genetic disease with multi-system effects that causes episodic crises. Quality of life and psychosocial effects of this rare disease have not previously been studied. To examine health-related quality of life (HRQoL), illness perceptions, and lived experience, we surveyed 16 children and 31 parents of children with TANGO2 disorder identified via a disease-specific social media group and research foundation email distribution list. We assessed HRQoL by parent proxy-report and child self-report using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™). Parental perceptions of their child's condition were assessed using the revised illness perceptions questionnaire adapted for TANGO2 disorder (IPQ-R-TANGO2). To collect qualitative data on parents' lived experience, we used novel open-ended survey questions. Parent proxy-reported (n = 29) physical (78.4 (21)) and psychosocial health (73.4 (12.8)) were highest among toddlers with TANGO2 disorder. Parent proxy-reported physical health was lowest in young adults (34.4 (35.4)), and psychosocial health was lowest in teens (40.8 (10.8)). When compared to previously published PedsQL™ scores in healthy children, parent-proxy reported summary and scale scores for TANGO2 patients were significantly lower (all p < 0.001). Parents' IPQ-R-TANGO2 responses (n = 26) suggested that parents perceived significant negative consequences of the disease. Parents' open-ended survey responses (n = 21) highlighted that they derived support from the TANGO2 community. This study characterizes HRQoL in patients with TANGO2 disorder across a range of ages, identifies potential targets for HRQoL improvement, and provides valuable insight into the psychosocial effects of TANGO2 disorder on patients and their families., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Human Genetics.)

Leading medical and public health societies endorse comprehensive sex education, but only 20 states and Washington, D.C., currently require information about contraception when sex education is taught, and even fewer require the inclusion of topics such as gender diversity or consent. At the same time, social media use, especially the video-sharing app TikTok, is increasing among teens. TikTok, therefore, offers a novel opportunity to make up for shortcomings in sex education and convey sexual health information to adolescents. To describe the availability and content of sexual education on TikTok, we conducted a content analysis of themes for 100 sex education-focused videos. We found that female anatomy was the most frequently addressed topic. Sexual pleasure was the second most common theme, within which discussions of the female orgasm and arousal constituted the most common subtheme. Other common themes include contraception and sexual health. These sought-after topics may be incongruent with those presented in standard school- or home-based sex education or interactions with health care providers, and this disconnect suggests opportunities for health care providers and educators to initiate conversations or offer resources on these themes as part of routine interaction. We conclude with recommendations for future research to consider the factual accuracy of sex education on TikTok and determine how exposure to this content affects adolescents' understanding of the risks and benefits of intercourse, sexual practices, age- and gender-based sexual norms, and other health behaviors.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the link between individual behavior and public health, along with the importance of evidence-based efforts to promote prosocial individual behavior. Insights from behavioral science can inform the design of effective behavior change techniques, or nudges, to influence individual behavior. The MINDSPACE framework organizes 9 behavioral science principles that can be used to guide policy design: Messenger, Incentives, Norms, Defaults, Salience, Priming, Affect, Commitments, and Ego. Using MINDSPACE as an organizing framework, this article provides a review of the literature on nudges to influence prosocial behaviors relevant during a pandemic: handwashing, avoidance of social gatherings, self-isolation and social distancing, and sharing public health messages. Additionally, empirical evidence on the use of nudges during the first several months of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 is summarized. Recommendations regarding the use of nudges to achieve public health policy goals during pandemics are provided. Organizational leaders, policymakers, and practitioners can use nudges to promote public health when mandates are not politically feasible or enforceable.

Background and Objectives: Successful clinical integration of genomic sequencing (GS) requires evidence of its utility. While GS potentially has benefits (utilities) or harms (disutilities) across multiple domains of life for both patients and their families, there is as yet no empirically informed conceptual model of these effects. Our objective was to develop an empirically informed conceptual model of perceived utility of GS that captures utilities and disutilities for patients and their families across diverse backgrounds., Methods: We took a patient-centered approach, in which we began with a review of existing literature followed by collection of primary interview data. We conducted semi-structured interviews to explore types of utility in a clinically and sociopolitically diverse sample of 60 adults from seven Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium projects. Interviewees had either personally received, or were parents of a child who had received, GS results. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings from interviews were integrated with existing literature on clinical and personal utility to form the basis of an initial conceptual model that was refined based on expert review and feedback., Results: Five key utility types that have been previously identified in qualitative literature held up as primary domains of utility and disutility in our diverse sample. Interview data were used to specify and organize subdomains of an initial conceptual model. After expert refinement, the five primary domains included in the final model are clinical, emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and social, and several subdomains are specified within each., Conclusion: We present an empirically informed conceptual model of perceived utility of GS. This model can be used to guide development of instruments for patient-centered outcome measurement that capture the range of relevant utilities and disutilities and inform clinical implementation of GS., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Introduction: With increasing utility and decreasing cost of genomic sequencing, augmentation of standard newborn screening (NBS) programs with newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) has been proposed. Before nGS can be integrated into newborn screening, parents' perspectives must be better understood. Objective: Using data from surveys administered to parents of healthy newborns who were enrolled in the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial of nGS alongside NBS, this paper reports parents' attitudes regarding population-based NBS and nGS assessed 3 months after results disclosure. Methods: Parental attitudes regarding whether all newborns should receive, and whether informed consent should be required for, NBS and nGS, as well as whether nGS should be mandated were assessed using 5-point scales from strongly disagree (=1) to strongly agree (=5). Parents' interest in receiving types of results from nGS was assessed on a 5-point scale from not at all interested (=1) to very interested (=5). Survey responses were analyzed using Fisher's exact tests, paired t-tests, and repeated measures ANOVA. Results: At 3 months post-disclosure, 248 parents of 174 healthy newborns submitted a survey. Support for every newborn receiving standard NBS (mean 4.67) was higher than that for every newborn receiving nGS (mean 3.60; p < 0.001). Support for required informed consent for NBS (mean 3.44) was lower than that for nGS (mean 4.27, p < 0.001). Parents' attitudes toward NBS and nGS were not significantly associated with self-reported political orientation. If hypothetically receiving nGS outside of the BabySeq Project, most parents reported being very interested in receiving information on their baby's risk of developing a disease in childhood that can be prevented, treated, or cured (86.8%) and their risk of developing a disease during adulthood that can be prevented, treated, or cured (84.6%). Discussion: Parents' opinions are crucial to inform design and delivery of public health programs, as the success of the program hinges on parents' trust and participation. To accommodate parents' preferences without affecting the current high participation rates in NBS, an optional add-on consent to nGS in addition to NBS may be a feasible approach. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511., Competing Interests: RG has received compensation for advising the following companies: AIA, Allelica, Embryome, Genomic Life, Grail, Humanity, Kneed Media, Meenta, OptumLabs, Plumcare, Verily, VinBigData; and is co-founder of Genome Medical. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Armstrong, Christensen, Genetti, Parad, Robinson, Blout Zawatsky, Zettler, Beggs, Holm, Green, McGuire, Smith and Pereira.)

Purpose: There is limited payer coverage for genome sequencing (GS) relative to exome sequencing (ES) in the U.S. Our objective was to assess payers' considerations for coverage of GS versus coverage of ES and requirements payers have for coverage of GS. The study was conducted by the NIH-funded Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium (CSER)., Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives of private payer organizations (payers, N = 12) on considerations and evidentiary and other needs for coverage of GS and ES. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis., Results: We described four categories of findings and solutions: demonstrated merits of GS versus ES, enhanced methods for evidence generation, consistent laboratory processes/sequencing methods, and enhanced implementation/care delivery. Payers see advantages to GS vs. ES and are open to broader GS coverage but need more proof of these advantages to consider them in coverage decision-making. Next steps include establishing evidence of benefits in specific clinical scenarios, developing quality standards, ensuring transparency of laboratory methods, developing clinical centers of excellence, and incorporating the role of genetic professionals., Conclusion: By comparing coverage considerations for GS and ES, we identified a path forward for coverage of GS. Future research should explicitly address payers' conditions for coverage., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr. Phillips receives consulting income from Illumina, Inc, not related to this manuscript. Mr. Douglas receives consulting income from Illumina, Inc, not related to this manuscript. Dr. Slavotinek receives consulting income from UptoDate, Inc and income for editorial duties from John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All other authors: declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in adults in the United States, yet the benefits of genetic testing are not universally accepted., Methods: We developed the "HeartCare" panel of genes associated with CVD, evaluating high-penetrance Mendelian conditions, coronary artery disease (CAD) polygenic risk, LPA gene polymorphisms, and specific pharmacogenetic (PGx) variants. We enrolled 709 individuals from cardiology clinics at Baylor College of Medicine, and samples were analyzed in a CAP/CLIA-certified laboratory. Results were returned to the ordering physician and uploaded to the electronic medical record., Results: Notably, 32% of patients had a genetic finding with clinical management implications, even after excluding PGx results, including 9% who were molecularly diagnosed with a Mendelian condition. Among surveyed physicians, 84% reported medical management changes based on these results, including specialist referrals, cardiac tests, and medication changes. LPA polymorphisms and high polygenic risk of CAD were found in 20% and 9% of patients, respectively, leading to diet, lifestyle, and other changes. Warfarin and simvastatin pharmacogenetic variants were present in roughly half of the cohort., Conclusion: Our results support the use of genetic information in routine cardiovascular health management and provide a roadmap for accompanying research., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.)

Prior to integration into clinical care, a novel medical innovation is typically assessed in terms of its balance of benefits and risks, often referred to as utility. Members of multidisciplinary research teams may conceptualize and assess utility in different ways, which has implications within the translational genomics community and for the evidence base upon which clinical guidelines groups and healthcare payers make decisions. Ambiguity in the conceptualization of utility in translational genomics research can lead to communication challenges within research teams and to study designs that do not meet stakeholder needs. We seek to address the ambiguity challenge by describing the conceptual understanding of utility and use of the term by scholars in the fields of philosophy, medicine, and the social sciences of decision psychology and health economics. We illustrate applications of each field's orientation to translational genomics research by using examples from the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, and we provide recommendations for increasing clarity and cohesion in future research. Given that different understandings of utility will align to a greater or lesser degree with important stakeholders' views, more precise use of the term can help researchers to better integrate multidisciplinary investigations and communicate with stakeholders., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests A.L.M. is a member of The American Journal of Human Genetics editorial board. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 American Society of Human Genetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Newborn genomic sequencing (nGS) may provide health benefits throughout the life span, but there are concerns that it could also have an unfavorable (ie, negative) psychosocial effect on families., Objective: To assess the psychosocial effect of nGS on families from the BabySeq Project, a randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of nGS on the clinical care of newborns from well-baby nurseries and intensive care units., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted from May 14, 2015, to May 21, 2019, at well-baby nurseries and intensive care units at 3 Boston, Massachusetts, area hospitals, 519 parents of 325 infants completed surveys at enrollment, immediately after disclosure of nGS results, and 3 and 10 months after results disclosure. Statistical analysis was performed on a per-protocol basis from January 16, 2019, to December 1, 2019., Intervention: Newborns were randomized to receive either standard newborn screening and a family history report (control group) or the same plus an nGS report of childhood-onset conditions and highly actionable adult-onset conditions (nGS group)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean responses were compared between groups and, within the nGS group, between parents of children who received a monogenic disease risk finding and those who did not in 3 domains of psychosocial impact: parent-child relationship (Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale), parents' relationship (Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale), and parents' psychological distress (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale)., Results: A total of 519 parents (275 women [53.0%]; mean [SD] age, 35.1 [4.5] years) were included in this study. Although mean scores differed for some outcomes at singular time points, generalized estimating equations models did not show meaningful differences in parent-child relationship (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale scores: postdisclosure, 0.04 [0.15]; 3 months, -0.18 [0.18]; 10 months, -0.07 [0.20]; joint P = .57) or parents' psychological distress (between-group ratio of adjusted mean [SE] Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores: postdisclosure, 1.04 [0.08]; 3 months, 1.07 [0.11]; joint P = .80) response patterns between study groups over time for any measures analyzed in these 2 domains. Response patterns on one parents' relationship measure differed between groups over time (between-group difference in adjusted mean [SE] Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale scores: postdisclosure, -0.19 [0.07]; 3 months, -0.04 [0.07]; and 10 months, -0.01 [0.08]; joint P = .02), but the effect decreased over time and no difference was observed on the conflict measure responses over time. We found no evidence of persistent negative psychosocial effect in any domain., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of nGS, there was no persistent negative psychosocial effect on families among those who received nGS nor among those who received a monogenic disease risk finding for their infant., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02422511.