Release of reclassified VUS results of now deceased patients to family members: Practices and opinions.

Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are commonly identified in genetic testing. The rate at which a VUS is reclassified depends on multiple factors. However, as the amount of time it might take for a VUS to be reclassified varies, some patients with a VUS genetic testing result might have passed away before the VUS is reclassified. A VUS that is reclassified after the patient's death has clinical implications for the deceased patient's family members. The disclosure of reclassified VUS results for a deceased patient has complex legal and ethical implications. There are no established guidelines on how the reclassified VUS result for a deceased patient should be disclosed to at-risk relatives. An online survey was sent to members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGCs) to elicit practices and opinions regarding this issue. A total of 153 (4%) NSGC members completed the survey. Thirty-seven (24.2%) respondents reported having received a reclassified VUS for a deceased patient. Respondents were more likely to attempt disclosure if the variant was reclassified as pathogenic (93.5%) versus benign (76.5%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06). Respondents more often reported the impact on family members (85.5%) than the decedent's right to privacy (15.0%) as extremely important when considering disclosure to family members. A legal mechanism to allow disclosure to relatives was supported by 70.6% of respondents and 97.4% felt the issue was important enough to pursue if such a process was in place. Only 9.8% of respondents supported a legal requirement of consent before disclosing to family members when a VUS is reclassified after the patient has passed away. Our results indicate that there is no consensus for how these results should be handled and a mechanism for disclosure of reclassified results to family members is supported.

Prenatal and fetal diagnosis of trisomy 18 after low-risk cell-free fetal DNA screening: A report of four cases.

INTRODUCTION: Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening (NIPS) is a useful screening method for common aneuploidies that can occur in pregnancies. It yields high sensitivities and specificities for the targeted conditions it tests for. Most commonly, these include Trisomies in chromosomes 21, 18, and 13, as well as aneuploidies in chromosomes X and Y. It does not, however, replace diagnostic testing. We review four cases seen by our institutions of patients who had NIPS performed with low-risk results and subsequently had fetuses affected with trisomy 18. METHODS: All fetal samples were evaluated by level II anatomic ultrasound and tested on amniocytes or products of conception through karyotype or chromosomal microarray following low-risk NIPS. RESULTS: None of the fetuses showed evidence of mosaicism and had features (both on ultrasound and postnatally) consistent with Trisomy 18. Postnatal fluorescence in situ hybridization performed on Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded tissue from 3 of the affected pregnancies' placentas identified mosaicism of trisomy 18. DISCUSSION: We discuss the possible explanations for the discrepancy between NIPS results and fetal karyotype, including, but not limited to placental mosaicism, placental size, and limitations of NIPS as a screening test.