The motivation and process for developing a consortium-wide time and motion study to estimate resource implications of innovations in the use of genome sequencing to inform patient care.

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.

Diagnostic yield of pediatric and prenatal exome sequencing in a diverse population.

The diagnostic yield of exome sequencing (ES) has primarily been evaluated in individuals of European ancestry, with less focus on underrepresented minority (URM) and underserved (US) patients. We evaluated the diagnostic yield of ES in a cohort of predominantly US and URM pediatric and prenatal patients suspected to have a genetic disorder. Eligible pediatric patients had multiple congenital anomalies and/or neurocognitive disabilities and prenatal patients had one or more structural anomalies, disorders of fetal growth, or fetal effusions. URM and US patients were prioritized for enrollment and underwent ES at a single academic center. We identified definitive positive or probable positive results in 201/845 (23.8%) patients, with a significantly higher diagnostic rate in pediatric (26.7%) compared to prenatal patients (19.0%) (P = 0.01). For both pediatric and prenatal patients, the diagnostic yield and frequency of inconclusive findings did not differ significantly between URM and non-URM patients or between patients with US status and those without US status. Our results demonstrate a similar diagnostic yield of ES between prenatal and pediatric URM/US patients and non-URM/US patients for positive and inconclusive results. These data support the use of ES to identify clinically relevant variants in patients from diverse populations.

Information-seeking preferences in diverse patients receiving a genetic testing result in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) study.

PURPOSE: Accurate and understandable information after genetic testing is critical for patients, family members, and professionals alike. METHODS: As part of a cross-site study from the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium, we investigated the information-seeking practices among patients and family members at 5 to 7 months after genetic testing results disclosure, assessing the perceived utility of a variety of information sources, such as family and friends, health care providers, support groups, and the internet. RESULTS: We found that individuals placed a high value on information obtained from genetics professionals and health care workers, independent of genetic testing result case classifications as positive, inconclusive, or negative. The internet was also highly utilized and ranked. Study participants rated some information sources as more useful for positive results compared with inconclusive or negative outcomes, emphasizing that it may be difficult to identify helpful information for individuals receiving an uncertain or negative result. There were few data from non-English speakers, highlighting the need to develop strategies to reach this population. CONCLUSION: Our study emphasizes the need for clinicians to provide accurate and comprehensible information to individuals from diverse populations after genetic testing.

Perspectives and preferences regarding genomic secondary findings in underrepresented prenatal and pediatric populations: A mixed-methods approach.

PURPOSE: Patients undergoing clinical exome sequencing (ES) are routinely offered the option to receive secondary findings (SF). However, little is known about the views of individuals from underrepresented minority pediatric or prenatal populations regarding SF. METHODS: We explored the preferences for receiving hypothetical categories of SF (H-SF) and reasons for accepting or declining actual SF through surveying (n = 149) and/or interviewing (n = 47) 190 families undergoing pediatric or prenatal ES. RESULTS: Underrepresented minorities made up 75% of the probands. In total, 150 families (79%) accepted SF as part of their child/fetus's ES. Most families (63%) wanted all categories of H-SF. Those who declined SF as part of ES were less likely to want H-SF across all categories. Interview findings indicate that some families did not recall their SF decision. Preparing for the future was a major motivator for accepting SF, and concerns about privacy, discrimination, and psychological effect drove decliners. CONCLUSION: A notable subset of families (37%) did not want at least 1 category of H-SF, suggesting more hesitancy about receiving all available results than previously reported. The lack of recollection of SF decisions suggests a need for alternative communication approaches. Results highlight the importance of the inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research.

Predicting genes from phenotypes using human phenotype ontology (HPO) terms.

The interpretation of genomic variants following whole exome sequencing (WES) can be aided using human phenotype ontology (HPO) terms to standardize clinical features and predict causative genes. We performed WES on 453 patients diagnosed prior to 18 years of age and identified 114 pathogenic (P) or likely pathogenic (LP) variants in 112 patients. We utilized PhenoDB to extract HPO terms from provider notes and then used Phen2Gene to generate a gene score and gene ranking from each list of HPO terms. We assigned Phen2Gene gene rankings to 6 rank classes, with class 1 covering raw gene rankings of 1 to 10 and class 2 covering rankings from 11 to 50 out of a total of 17,126 possible gene rankings. Phen2Gene ranked causative genes into rank class 1 or 2 in 27.7% of cases and the genes in rank class 1 were all associated with well-characterized phenotypes. We found significant associations between the gene score and the number of years, since the gene was first published, the number of HPO terms with an hierarchical depth greater or equal to 11, and the number of Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man terms associated with the phenotype and gene. We conclude that genes associated with recognizable phenotypes and terms deep in the HPO hierarchy have the best chance of producing a high gene score and ranking in class 1 to 2 using Phen2Gene software with HPO terms. Clinicians and laboratory staff should consider these results when HPO terms are employed to prioritize candidate genes.

Examining access to care in clinical genomic research and medicine: Experiences from the CSER Consortium.

INTRODUCTION: Ensuring equitable access to health care is a widely agreed-upon goal in medicine, yet access to care is a multidimensional concept that is difficult to measure. Although frameworks exist to evaluate access to care generally, the concept of "access to genomic medicine" is largely unexplored and a clear framework for studying and addressing major dimensions is lacking. METHODS: Comprised of seven clinical genomic research projects, the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium (CSER) presented opportunities to examine access to genomic medicine across diverse contexts. CSER emphasized engaging historically underrepresented and/or underserved populations. We used descriptive analysis of CSER participant survey data and qualitative case studies to explore anticipated and encountered access barriers and interventions to address them. RESULTS: CSER's enrolled population was largely lower income and racially and ethnically diverse, with many Spanish-preferring individuals. In surveys, less than a fifth (18.7%) of participants reported experiencing barriers to care. However, CSER project case studies revealed a more nuanced picture that highlighted the blurred boundary between access to genomic research and clinical care. Drawing on insights from CSER, we build on an existing framework to characterize the concept and dimensions of access to genomic medicine along with associated measures and improvement strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support adopting a broad conceptualization of access to care encompassing multiple dimensions, using mixed methods to study access issues, and investing in innovative improvement strategies. This conceptualization may inform clinical translation of other cutting-edge technologies and contribute to the promotion of equitable, effective, and efficient access to genomic medicine.