Search

During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic skyrocketing demand for testing in the United States, coupled with supply chain issues, necessitated the use of multiple SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing platforms at many health centers. At our institution these platforms consisted of 8 ordered services for sample triage, using 9 emergency use authorized (EUA) SARS-CoV-2 RNA nucleic acid amplification tests resulting in 10 possible ordered service/EAU combinations. Here we review the results of the first ∼2.9 million samples tested and note the variability in positivity rates. We conclude that differences in reported limit of detection did not translate to differences in positivity rate or show correlation to discordant results observed. This highlights the importance of balancing patient testing capacity needs with the desire to have more sensitive tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) include three main conditions: autistic disorder (AD), pervasive developmental disorder, not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), and Asperger syndrome. It has been shown that many genes associated with ASDs are involved in the neuroligin-neurexin interaction at the glutamate synapse: NLGN3, NLGN4, NRXN1, CNTNAP2, and SHANK3. We screened this last gene in two cohorts of ASD patients (133 patients from US and 88 from Italy). We found 5/221 (2.3%) cases with pathogenic alterations: a 106 kb deletion encompassing the SHANK3 gene, two frameshift mutations leading to premature stop codons, a missense mutation (p.Pro141Ala), and a splicing mutation (c.1820-4 G>A). Additionally, in 17 patients (7.7%) we detected a c.1304+48C>T transition affecting a methylated cytosine in a CpG island. This variant is reported as SNP rs76224556 and was found in both US and Italian controls, but it results significantly more frequent in our cases than in the control cohorts. The variant is also significantly more common among PDD-NOS cases than in AD cases. We also screened this gene in an independent replication cohort of 104 US patients with ASDs, in which we found a missense mutation (p.Ala1468Ser) in 1 patient (0.9%), and in 8 patients (7.7%) we detected the c.1304+48C>T transition. While SHANK3 variants are present in any ASD subtype, the SNP rs76224556 appears to be significantly associated with PDD-NOS cases. This represents the first evidence of a genotype-phenotype correlation in ASDs and highlights the importance of a detailed clinical-neuropsychiatric evaluation for the effective genetic screening of ASD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term "race" has been employed to categorize human beings into distinct groups based on some perceived biological distinctions. This concept was debunked with the completion of the Human Genome Project and its revolutionary findings that all humans are >99% genetically identical, subsequently making the term "race" obsolete. Unfortunately, the previous misconception is being propagated by the continued use of the term to capture demographic information in healthcare in an attempt to improve equity. This paper seeks to review the history of the term "race", analyze the current policy, and discuss its limitations. It is important to note that our analysis was exclusively focused on the United States healthcare system and the Affordable Care Act; as such, it may not reflect other regions' policies, including those in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. However, we feel that this policy analysis may serve as a model to recommend alterations that mirror the post-genomic era. The need for this policy change was recently highlighted in the 2022 ASHG presidential address, One Human Race: Billions of Genomes, and will reflect the knowledge gleaned by the scientific community through the conclusions of the Human Genome Project.

Background: As technology advances and genomic testing becomes commonplace, incidental findings, or the discovery of unrelated results, have increased. The American College of Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) established recommendations for the return of pathologic variants in 78 genes in the clinical setting based on medically actionable conditions from genes linked with preventable or treatable diseases. However, the lack of policy in the research setting poses a serious ethical dilemma for researchers, potentially threatening the participant's trust and willingness to contribute to a process with more significant risk than benefit., Purpose: Our goal was to determine the preferred ethical approach to handling incidental research findings and suggest a new standard for investigators and participants., Methods: By employing Wueste's IAJD Framework of ethical evaluation, the current research policy, as well as a proposed policy, were analyzed, and then a policy analysis was employed to ascertain feasibility., Results and Discussion: The current policy of leaving the decision of returning incidental findings up to the researcher's discretion is an ethical failure from the consequential, deontological, and intellectual freedom perspectives. However, the proposed policy of implementing the ACMG guidance for researchers to satisfy ethical demands reinforces its moral fortitude. In a period of increasing public awareness, the community, which is the prospective research pool, has increased demands for autonomy and less paternalistic behavior from medicine and science. This paper synthesizes recommendations by numerous organizations to establish a mutually beneficial policy that will ensure the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) goal, stated in the 2014 Joint Rule, of making participants "partners" in research a reality., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.