RESUMO
While the prevalence of genetic disorders has been well documented in the Muslim-majority, low-socioeconomic country of Pakistan, the provision of medical genetic services remains limited and cost-prohibitive to the masses in the country. With the objective of identifying gaps in the provision of medical genetics services as perceived by the healthcare providers and the general public, the Pakistani Society of Medical Genetics and Genomics (PSMG) organized a needs assessment webinar on December 6, 2020, titled, "A Vibrant Discussion on the Current Status and Future Needs of Medical Genetic Services in Pakistan." The objectives of the webinar were (1) to explore the current availability of medical genetics services, (2) to identify areas in clinical genetics delivery models needed to improve the state of medical genetics in the country, and (3) to garner the interest in such provisions from the expert and lay audience. The webinar consisted of a moderator-led, structured interview of an expert panel including the following topics: (1) postgraduate clinical genetics and genetic counseling training programs, (2) medical genetics clinics and formal genetic counseling services), (3) clinical genetic testing and (4) patient support and advocacy groups. The webinar was followed by a short, web-based survey completed by 35 of the 60 attendees. The results of this survey indicated overwhelming support for establishing formal genetic counseling educational opportunities (91.6%) and increasing the availability of genetic testing (100%). This report further summarizes the opinions and recommendations of the panelists and the audience survey results.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Clinically impactful differences in the interpretation of genetic test results occur between laboratories and clinicians. To improve the classification of variants, a better understanding of why discrepancies occur and how they can be reduced is needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the frequency, causes, and resolution of discordant variant classifications in the Sarcomeric Human Cardiomyopathy Registry (SHaRe), a consortium of international centers with expertise in the clinical management and genetic architecture of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Of the 112 variants present in patients at >1 center, 23 had discordant classifications among centers (20.5%; Fleiss κ, 0.54). Discordance was more than twice as frequent among clinical laboratories in ClinVar, a public archive of variant classifications (315/695 variants; 45.2%; Fleiss κ, 0.30; P<0.001). Discordance in SHaRe most frequently occurred because hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers had access to different privately held data when making their classifications (75.0%). Centers reassessed their classifications based on a comprehensive and current data summary, leading to reclassifications that reduced the discordance rate from 20.5% to 10.7%. Different interpretations of rarity and co-occurrence with pathogenic variants contributed to residual discordance. CONCLUSIONS: Discordance in variant classification among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy centers is largely attributable to privately held data. Some discrepancies are caused by differences in expert assessment of conflicting data. Discordance was markedly lower among centers specialized in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy than among clinical laboratories, suggesting that optimal genetic test interpretation occurs in the context of clinical care delivered by specialized centers with both clinical and genetics expertise.
