Health care utilization and behavior changes after workplace genetic testing at a large US health care system.

PURPOSE: This study explored employee health behavior changes and health care utilization after workplace genetic testing (wGT). Wellness-program-associated wGT seeks to improve employee health, but the related health implications are unknown. METHODS: Employees of a large US health care system offering wGT (cancer, heart disease, and pharmacogenomics [PGx]) were sent electronic surveys. Self-reported data from those who received test results were analyzed. Descriptive statistics characterized responses, whereas logistic regression analyses explored correlates of responses to wGT. RESULTS: 53.9% (n = 418/776) of respondents (88.3% female, mean age = 44 years) reported receiving wGT results. 12.0% (n = 48/399) received results indicating increased risk (IR) of cancer, 9.5% (n = 38/398) had IR of heart disease, and 31.4% (n = 125/398) received informative PGx results. IR results for cancer and/or heart disease (n = 67) were associated with health behavior changes (adjusted odds ratio: 3.23; 95% CI 1.75, 6.13; P < .001) and health care utilization (adjusted odds ratio: 8.60; 95% CI 4.43, 17.5; P < .001). Informative PGx results (n = 125) were associated with medication changes (PGx-informative: 15.2%; PGx-uninformative: 4.8%; P = .002). CONCLUSION: This study explored employee responses to wGT, contributing to the understanding of the ethical and social implications of wGT. Receiving IR results from wGT may promote health behavior changes and health care utilization in employees.

Rationale and design of the Nephrotic Syndrome Study Network (NEPTUNE) Match in glomerular diseases: designing the right trial for the right patient, today.

Glomerular diseases are classified using a descriptive taxonomy that is not reflective of the heterogeneous underlying molecular drivers. This limits not only diagnostic and therapeutic patient management, but also impacts clinical trials evaluating targeted interventions. The Nephrotic Syndrome Study Network (NEPTUNE) is poised to address these challenges. The study has enrolled >850 pediatric and adult patients with proteinuric glomerular diseases who have contributed to deep clinical, histologic, genetic, and molecular profiles linked to long-term outcomes. The NEPTUNE Knowledge Network, comprising combined, multiscalar data sets, captures each participant's molecular disease processes at the time of kidney biopsy. In this editorial, we describe the design and implementation of NEPTUNE Match, which bridges a basic science discovery pipeline with targeted clinical trials. Noninvasive biomarkers have been developed for real-time pathway analyses. A Molecular Nephrology Board reviews the pathway maps together with clinical, laboratory, and histopathologic data assembled for each patient to compile a Match report that estimates the fit between the specific molecular disease pathway(s) identified in an individual patient and proposed clinical trials. The NEPTUNE Match report is communicated using established protocols to the patient and the attending nephrologist for use in their selection of available clinical trials. NEPTUNE Match represents the first application of precision medicine in nephrology with the aim of developing targeted therapies and providing the right medication for each patient with primary glomerular disease.

Assessment of the Needs of Nephrology Divisions to Implement Return of Clinically Significant Research Genetic Results: A Survey of Nephrotic Syndrome Study Network (NEPTUNE) Investigators.

Introduction: There is an increasing need to return genetic testing results to patients with kidney disease who were first genotyped on a research basis. Operationalizing this process in nephrology clinics is challenged by a limited number of genetic providers with whom to partner and a general lack of support services for all clinicians. Methods: We administered a survey in March 2022 to assess the current ability and ongoing needs of nephrology divisions to return clinically significant research genetic results to patients and to implement clinical genetic testing. This survey was distributed to institutions within the Nephrotic Syndrome Study Network (NEPTUNE) as part of the planning process for return of research genetic results to participants with pathogenic variants in Mendelian nephrotic syndrome genes. Results: Twenty-seven of 28 sites (96%) completed the survey. 59% (n = 16) of sites said they could handle return of research genetic results independently, with the rest expressing hesitation about the volume and complexity of patients and the limited resources and access to genetics services. 81% (n = 22) of these institutions did have a genetics clinic and 26% (n = 7) have a nephrology genetics clinic. However, 70% (n = 10) of these clinics have a waiting time over 1 month. 89% of divisions (n = 24) were conducting genetic testing and 96% of those (n = 23) used a kidney multi-gene panel. In 46% of divisions (n = 11), nephrologists were handling logistics of obtaining genetic testing samples themselves. Conclusion: We identified specific areas of support needed for return of clinically significant genetic results from research studies. While the surveyed nephrologists were conducting genetic testing, there were limitations in the support services available. This survey will help guide other research studies that wish to return genetic results to participants and also highlight the need for increasing support to effectively operationalize genetic testing in nephrology clinics.

Incorporating Genetic Testing Into the Care of Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis/Frontotemporal Degeneration Spectrum Disorders.

Purpose of Review: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) spectrum disorders have a strong genetic component. Genetic counselors are a limited resource, and therefore, other providers must be prepared to integrate genetic testing into their practice. Recent Findings: Recent ALS/FTD studies have demonstrated that lack of family history does not preclude a genetic etiology. The benefits of a genetic diagnosis have expanded to include the potential to treat; thus, genetic testing is increasingly recommended to be offered to all persons with ALS/FTD. Summary: Offering genetic testing to persons with ALS/FTD spectrum disorders should be part of routine clinical neurologic care. All genetic testing should include discussion about the medical and psychosocial implications of testing for the patient and family members. Neurologists should be prepared to facilitate this process and recognize when referral to a genetic counselor is indicated.

Defining critical educational components of informed consent for genetic testing: views of US-based genetic counselors and medical geneticists.

The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Consent and Disclosure Recommendation (CADRe) framework proposes that key components of informed consent for genetic testing can be covered with a targeted discussion for many conditions rather than a time-intensive traditional genetic counseling approach. We surveyed US genetics professionals (medical geneticists and genetic counselors) on their response to scenarios that proposed core informed consent concepts for clinical genetic testing developed in a prior expert consensus process. The anonymous online survey included responses to 3 (of 6 possible) different clinical scenarios that summarized the application of the core concepts. There was a binary (yes/no) question asking respondents whether they agreed the scenarios included the minimum necessary and critical educational concepts to allow an informed decision. Respondents then provided open-ended feedback on what concepts were missing or could be removed. At least one scenario was completed by 238 respondents. For all but one scenario, over 65% of respondents agreed that the identified concepts portrayed were sufficient for an informed decision; the exome scenario had the lowest agreement (58%). Qualitative analysis of the open-ended comments showed no consistently mentioned concepts to add or remove. The level of agreement with the example scenarios suggests that the minimum critical educational components for pre-test informed consent proposed in our prior work is a reasonable starting place for targeted pre-test discussions. This may be helpful in providing consistency to the clinical practice of both genetics and non-genetics providers, meeting patients' informational needs, tailoring consent for psychosocial support, and in future guideline development.

The Michigan Genetic Hereditary Testing (MiGHT) study's innovative approaches to promote uptake of clinical genetic testing among cancer patients: a study protocol for a 3-arm randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although most cancers are sporadic, germline genetic variants are implicated in 5-10% of cancer cases. Clinical genetic testing identifies pathogenic germline genetic variants for hereditary cancers. The Michigan Genetic Hereditary Testing (MiGHT) study is a three-arm randomized clinical trial that aims to test the efficacy of two patient-level behavioral interventions on uptake of cancer genetic testing. METHODS: The two interventions being tested are (1) a virtual genetics navigator and (2) motivational interviewing by genetic health coaches. Eligible participants are adults with a diagnosis of breast, prostate, endometrial, ovarian, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer who meet the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing. Participants are recruited through community oncology practices affiliated with the Michigan Oncology Quality Consortium (MOQC) and have used the Family Health History Tool (FHHT) to determine testing eligibility. The recruitment goal is 759 participants, who will be randomized to usual care or to either the virtual genetics navigator or the motivational interviewing intervention arms. The primary outcome will be the proportion of individuals who complete germline genetic testing within 6 months. DISCUSSION: This study addresses patient-level factors which are associated with the uptake of genetic testing. The study will test two different intervention approaches, both of which can help address the shortage of genetic counselors and improve access to care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan Medical School (HUM00192898) and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05162846).

The goldilocks conundrum: Disclosing discrimination risks in informed consent.

Informed consent is a foundational ethical and legal principle in human subjects research and clinical care. Yet, there is extensive debate over how much information must be disclosed to meet ethical goals and legal requirements, especially about non-medical risks. In this online, survey-based experiment of a diverse sample of the US general population, we explored one aspect of this debate by testing whether the level of detail included in informed consent regarding genetic anti-discrimination protections alters individuals' willingness to participate in a hypothetical research study and their concerns regarding genetic discrimination. Participants were randomized to receive sample informed consent language with one of three levels of disclosure regarding the protections and limitations of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). Our sample (n = 1,195) had a mean age of 45.9 (SD = 17.9) years and 40% with ≤high school education. Participants were 51.3% female and 36.7% non-Hispanic White. On average, those who received consent language with none of GINA's limitations highlighted were more willing to participate than those who were warned about various gaps in GINA. They also had significantly lower perceived risk of discrimination than those presented with the most information about limitations. Our study found that providing more comprehensive information about GINA notably lessened willingness to participate in the hypothetical studies, highlighting the need for clinicians and researchers to thoughtfully consider how to disclose anti-discrimination risks in informed consent.

Searching for Answers: Information-Seeking by Young People At-Risk for Huntington's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Health information-seeking is a coping strategy used globally by individuals with a personal or family history of a medical condition, including Huntington's disease (HD). OBJECTIVE: We sought to ascertain information-seeking practices of young people who grew up at-risk for HD. METHODS: Participants ages 18-25 were recruited from HD support organizations. An online 96-item survey assessed information-seeking motivations and timing as well as information topics accessed, sources, and needs. RESULTS: Fifty young adults (mean age 22.2 years) who grew up at-risk for HD responded. HD had been generally kept a secret (35.4%) or talked about but difficult to bring up (43.8%) in many families. Most (78.0%) became aware of HD in their family before age 15. Few (7.1%) received information resources at the time of disclosure. Most (68.1%) first sought information independently online, half within a week of disclosure. Respondents were motivated to understand the potential impact of HD on their personal lives and family members, obtain general information about the condition, and learn about treatments and research. Most sought information on clinical features and inheritance with > 80% interested in information on symptoms and personal risk and > 70% about having children. CONCLUSION: Limited information is provided to young people when first informed about HD in their families leading to independent, mostly online information-seeking. Information is used to build knowledge about HD to facilitate coping and life planning. Healthcare providers can direct young people to reliable resources and guide parents in talking with children to ensure that information needs are met.

Voluntary workplace genomic testing: wellness benefit or Pandora's box?

Consumer interest in genetic and genomic testing is growing rapidly, with more than 26 million Americans having purchased direct-to-consumer genetic testing services. Capitalizing on the increasing comfort of consumers with genetic testing outside the clinical environment, commercial vendors are expanding their customer base by marketing genetic and genomic testing services, including testing for pharmacogenomic and pathogenic variants, to employers for inclusion in workplace wellness programs. We describe the appeal of voluntary workplace genomic testing (wGT) to employers and employees, how the ethical, legal, and social implications literature has approached the issue of genetic testing in the workplace in the past, and outline the relevant legal landscape. Given that we are in the early stages of development of the wGT market, now is the time to identify the critical interests and concerns of employees and employers, so that governance can develop and evolve along with the wGT market, rather than behind it, and be based on data, rather than speculative hopes and fears.

Defining the Critical Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing.

PURPOSE: Informed consent for genetic testing has historically been acquired during pretest genetic counseling, without specific guidance defining which core concepts are required. METHODS: The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Consent and Disclosure Recommendations Workgroup (CADRe) used an expert consensus process to identify the core concepts essential to consent for clinical genetic testing. A literature review identified 77 concepts that are included in informed consent for genetic tests. Twenty-five experts (9 medical geneticists, 8 genetic counselors, and 9 bioethicists) completed two rounds of surveys ranking concepts' importance to informed consent. RESULTS: The most highly ranked concepts included: (1) genetic testing is voluntary; (2) why is the test recommended and what does it test for?; (3) what results will be returned and to whom?; (4) are there other types of potential results, and what choices exist?; (5) how will the prognosis and management be impacted by results?; (6) what is the potential family impact?; (7) what are the test limitations and next steps?; and (8) potential risk of genetic discrimination and legal protections. CONCLUSION: Defining the core concepts necessary for informed consent for genetic testing provides a foundation for quality patient care across a variety of healthcare providers and clinical indications.

The persistent lack of knowledge and misunderstanding of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) more than a decade after passage.

PURPOSE: More than a decade after the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) was passed, there is a paucity of research on the general public's awareness of GINA. This study's objective was to assess knowledge of GINA and concerns of genetic discrimination. METHODS: A quota-based sample of US adults (N = 421) was recruited via Qualtrics Research Services to complete an online survey. RESULTS: Overall, participants had a mean age of 43.1 (SD = 13.9), 51.8% identified as female, 63.1% identified as non-Hispanic White, and 38.4% had ≥4-year college degree. Respondents reported relatively low subjective knowledge of GINA (M = 3.10, SD = 1.98; 7-point Likert scale). Among respondents reporting high subjective knowledge of GINA (16.2%), 92.6% incorrectly reported or did not know that GINA does not covers life, long-term care, and disability insurance, and this number was 82.4% for auto or property insurance. Respondents were relatively likely to decline genetic testing due to concerns about results being used to determine eligibility for employment (M = 4.68, SD = 1.89) or health insurance (M = 4.94, SD = 1.73). There were few consistent demographic associations with either subjective or objective knowledge of GINA. CONCLUSION: This study highlights continued public concern about genetic discrimination and a lack of awareness and understanding of GINA and its scope of protections.

Genetic counseling, virtual visits, and equity in the era of COVID-19 and beyond.

Overnight, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth rapidly transitioned from limited application to widespread implementation. The field of genetic counseling was well positioned to make this transition to virtual care since there is generally less of a need for patients to be seen in-person for physical exams or urgent care. Going forward, virtual visits will presumably become a mainstay in the provision of genetic services and it is anticipated that clinics will adopt "hybrid" models with both in-person and virtual visit options. This commentary highlights the successes and challenges in the rapid implementation of virtual visits, focusing on who has benefited versus who has been challenged or left behind. We also discuss genetic testing considerations, including the additional steps required for patients and clinicians when testing is ordered outside of the clinical setting, which can result in delays or a lack of testing altogether. Future research considerations are presented to address the needs among the most vulnerable and help ensure equitable access and benefit.

Family members' perspectives on learning cognitively unimpaired older adults' amyloid-ß PET scan results.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Disclosure of Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information to cognitively unimpaired older adults may become more common if preclinical AD is shown to be identifiable and amenable to treatment. Little, however, is known about how families will react to this information. DESIGN AND SETTING: Semi-structured telephonic interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy study partners (mean age = 68 [±11]; 50% female; 70% spouses/significant others; 18% children, siblings; 12% friends) of cognitively unimpaired adults who learned a personalized AD dementia risk estimate and an amyloid-ß PET scan result through their participation in preclinical AD research. MEASUREMENT: Interviewees were asked about their desire for information regarding their family member's AD dementia risk, baseline expectations of risk, understanding of amyloid-ß PET scan results, and the impact of AD dementia risk information on emotions, health behaviors, and future plans, as well as on perceptions of their family member's or friend's memory. RESULTS: Interviewees generally understood the AD dementia risk information (83%) and considered it valuable (75%). Risk information perceived as favorable elicited feelings of happiness and relief; unfavorable information elicited disappointment, as well as increased awareness of the participants' memory and monitoring for incipient changes in cognition. While noting that AD dementia risk information was not medically actionable at this time due to the lack of disease-modifying therapies, some interviewees described changes to their family members' and their own health behaviors and future plans. CONCLUSION: Guidelines for the disclosure of AD dementia risk estimates and biomarker results to cognitively unimpaired adults should account for the needs and interests of individuals and their family members, who may step into a pre-caregiver role.

Application of a framework to guide genetic testing communication across clinical indications.

BACKGROUND: Genetic information is increasingly relevant across healthcare. Traditional genetic counseling (GC) may limit access to genetic information and may be more information and support than some individuals need. We report on the application and clinical implications of a framework to consistently integrate genetics expertise where it is most useful to patients. METHODS: The Clinical Genome Resource's (ClinGen) Consent and Disclosure Recommendations (CADRe) workgroup designed rubrics to guide pre- and post-genetic test communication. Using a standard set of testing indications, pre- and post-test rubrics were applied to 40 genetic conditions or testing modalities with diverse features, including variability in levels of penetrance, clinical actionability, and evidence supporting a gene-disease relationship. Final communication recommendations were reached by group consensus. RESULTS: Communication recommendations were determined for 478 unique condition-indication or testing-indication pairs. For half of the conditions and indications (238/478), targeted discussions (moderate communication depth) were the recommended starting communication level for pre- and post-test conversations. Traditional GC was recommended pre-test for adult-onset neurodegenerative conditions for individuals with no personal history and post-test for most conditions when genetic testing revealed a molecular diagnosis as these situations are likely higher in complexity and uncertainty. A brief communication approach was recommended for more straightforward conditions and indications (e.g., familial hypercholesterolemia; familial variant testing). CONCLUSIONS: The CADRe recommendations provide guidance for clinicians in determining the depth of pre- and post-test communication, strategically aligning the anticipated needs of patients with the starting communication approach. Shorter targeted discussions or brief communications are suggested for many tests and indications. Longer traditional GC consultations would be reserved for patients with more complex and uncertain situations where detailed information, education, and psychological support can be most beneficial. Future studies of the CADRe communication framework will be essential for determining if CADRe-informed care supports quality patient experience while improving access to genetic information across healthcare.

Disclosure of clinically actionable genetic variants to thoracic aortic dissection biobank participants.

BACKGROUND: Disclosure of pathogenic variants to thoracic aortic dissection biobank participants was implemented. The impact and costs, including confirmatory genetic testing in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified laboratory, were evaluated. METHODS: We exome sequenced 240 cases with thoracic aortic dissection and 258 controls, then examined 11 aortopathy genes. Pathogenic variants in 6 aortopathy genes (COL3A1, FBN1, LOX, PRKG1, SMAD3, and TGFBR2) were identified in 26 participants, representing 10.8% of the cohort (26/240). A second research sample was used to validate the initial findings. Mailed letters to participants disclosed that a potentially disease causing DNA alteration had been identified (neither the gene nor variant was disclosed). Participants were offered clinical genetic counseling and confirmatory genetic testing in a CLIA laboratory. RESULTS: Excluding 6 participants who were deceased or lost to follow-up, 20 participants received the disclosure letter, 10 of whom proceeded with genetic counseling, confirmatory genetic testing, and enrolled in a survey study. Participants reported satisfaction with the letter (4.2 ± 0.7) and genetic counseling (4.4 ± 0.4; [out of 5, respectively]). The psychosocial impact was characterized by low decisional regret (11.5 ± 11.6) and distress (16.0 ± 4.2, [out of 100, respectively]). The average cost for 26 participants was $400, including validation and sending letters. The average cost for those who received genetic counseling and CLIA laboratory confirmation was $605. CONCLUSIONS: Participants were satisfied with the return of clinically significant biobank genetic results and CLIA laboratory testing; however, the process required significant time and resources. These findings illustrate the trade-offs involved for researchers considering returning research genetic results.

Genetic testing and insurance implications: Surveying the US general population about discrimination concerns and knowledge of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).

Globally, due to public concerns of genetic discrimination, some countries and insurance industries have adopted policies restricting insurer use of genetic information, such as the US Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). This study reports on combined analysis of two surveys assessing public knowledge of GINA and concerns of genetic discrimination in a diverse U.S. sample (N=1616). We focus on whether occupation, genetic testing history, and insurance status are correlated with knowledge of GINA or concerns of discrimination. While bivariate analysis identified some populations with higher subjective/objective knowledge and concern relative to counterparts, multivariable regression identified very few significant associations with outcomes of interest. Overall, this study highlights lack of awareness and understanding of GINA, even among subpopulations hypothesized to have greater knowledge of the law. These findings have implications for the broader debate around insurer use of genetic information.