The Undiagnosed Diseases Network: Characteristics of solvable applicants and diagnostic suggestions for non-accepted ones.

PURPOSE: Can certain characteristics identify as solvable some undiagnosed patients who seek extensive evaluation and thorough record review, like by the Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN)? METHODS: The UDN is a national research resource to solve medical mysteries through team science. Applicants provide informed consent to access to their medical records. After review, expert panels assess if applicants meet inclusion and exclusion criteria to select participants. When not accepting applicants, UDN experts may offer suggestions for diagnostic efforts. Using minimal information from initial applications, we compare features in applicants not accepted with those accepted and either solved or still not solved by the UDN. The diagnostic suggestions offered to non-accepted applicants and their clinicians were tallied. RESULTS: Non-accepted applicants were more often female, older at first symptoms and application, and longer in review than accepted applicants. The accepted and successfully diagnosed applicants were younger in ages, shorter in review time, more often non-white, of Hispanic ethnicity, and presenting with nervous system features. Half of non-accepted applicants were given suggestions for further local diagnostic evaluation. A few seemed to have two major diagnoses or a provocative environmental exposure history. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive UDN record review generates possibly helpful advice.

The clinical utility of polygenic risk scores in genomic medicine practices: a systematic review.

Genomic medicine aims to improve health using the individual genomic data of people to inform care. While clinical utility of genomic medicine in many monogenic, Mendelian disorders is amply demonstrated, clinical utility is less evident in polygenic traits, e.g., coronary artery disease or breast cancer. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are subsets of individual genotypes designed to capture heritability of common traits, and hence to allow the stratification of risk of the trait in a population. We systematically reviewed the PubMed database for unequivocal evidence of clinical utility of polygenic risk scores, using stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. While we identified studies demonstrating clinical validity in conditions where medical intervention based on a PRS is likely to benefit patient outcome, we did not identify a single study demonstrating unequivocally such a benefit, i.e. clinical utility. We conclude that while the routine use of PRSs hold great promise, translational research is still needed before they should enter mainstream clinical practice.

A research agenda to support the development and implementation of genomics-based clinical informatics tools and resources.

OBJECTIVE: The Genomic Medicine Working Group of the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research virtually hosted its 13th genomic medicine meeting titled "Developing a Clinical Genomic Informatics Research Agenda". The meeting's goal was to articulate a research strategy to develop Genomics-based Clinical Informatics Tools and Resources (GCIT) to improve the detection, treatment, and reporting of genetic disorders in clinical settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experts from government agencies, the private sector, and academia in genomic medicine and clinical informatics were invited to address the meeting's goals. Invitees were also asked to complete a survey to assess important considerations needed to develop a genomic-based clinical informatics research strategy. RESULTS: Outcomes from the meeting included identifying short-term research needs, such as designing and implementing standards-based interfaces between laboratory information systems and electronic health records, as well as long-term projects, such as identifying and addressing barriers related to the establishment and implementation of genomic data exchange systems that, in turn, the research community could help address. DISCUSSION: Discussions centered on identifying gaps and barriers that impede the use of GCIT in genomic medicine. Emergent themes from the meeting included developing an implementation science framework, defining a value proposition for all stakeholders, fostering engagement with patients and partners to develop applications under patient control, promoting the use of relevant clinical workflows in research, and lowering related barriers to regulatory processes. Another key theme was recognizing pervasive biases in data and information systems, algorithms, access, value, and knowledge repositories and identifying ways to resolve them.