Perplexed by PGx? Exploring the impact of pharmacogenomic results on medical management, disclosures and patient behavior.

Pharmacogenomic (PGx) tests represent significant advances in precision medicine. Our aim was to explore perceptions following the return of PGx results, medication management, and disclosure to providers. We surveyed clients who had PGx testing and conducted a chart review of PGx results. Respectively, 84% and 94% of participants found pre- and post-test genetic counseling helpful. There was a significant difference in disclosure, while 6% disclosed results to a pharmacist, 50% disclosed to a physician. Qualitative analysis identified three themes: 1) psychological response; 2) perceived utility; 3) experiences with disclosure. Our study supports the provision of genetic counseling for a non-disease related genetic test. Benefits of PGx testing can be optimized by the collaboration of physicians, pharmacists, genetic counselors and patients.

No. 348-Joint SOGC-CCMG Guideline: Update on Prenatal Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy, Fetal Anomalies, and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To review the available prenatal screening options in light of the recent technical advances and to provide an update of previous guidelines in the field of prenatal screening. INTENDED USERS: Health care providers involved in prenatal screening, including general practitioners, obstetricians, midwives, maternal fetal medicine specialists, geneticists, and radiologists. TARGET POPULATION: All pregnant women receiving counselling and providing informed consent for prenatal screening. EVIDENCE: Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library in and prior to March 2016 using an appropriate controlled vocabulary (prenatal diagnosis, amniocentesis, chorionic villi sampling, non-invasive prenatal screening) and key words (prenatal screening, prenatal genetic counselling). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English and published from January 1985 to May 2016. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical speciality societies. GUIDELINE UPDATE: Evidence will be reviewed 5 years after publication to determine whether all or part of the guideline should be updated. However, if important new evidence is published prior to the 5-year cycle, the review process may be accelerated for a more rapid update of some recommendations.

No. 261-Prenatal Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy in Singleton Pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a Canadian consensus document on maternal screening for fetal aneuploidy (e.g., Down syndrome and trisomy 18) in singleton pregnancies. OPTIONS: Pregnancy screening for fetal aneuploidy started in the mid 1960s, using maternal age as the screening test. New developments in maternal serum and ultrasound screening have made it possible to offer all pregnant patients a non-invasive screening test to assess their risk of having a fetus with aneuploidy to determine whether invasive prenatal diagnostic testing is necessary. This document reviews the options available for non-invasive screening and makes recommendations for Canadian patients and health care workers. OUTCOMES: To offer non-invasive screening for fetal aneuploidy (trisomy 13, 18, 21) to all pregnant women. Invasive prenatal diagnosis would be offered to women who screen above a set risk cut-off level on non-invasive screening or to pregnant women whose personal, obstetrical, or family history places them at increased risk. Currently available non-invasive screening options include maternal age combined with one of the following: (1) first trimester screening (nuchal translucency, maternal age, and maternal serum biochemical markers), (2) second trimester serum screening (maternal age and maternal serum biochemical markers), or (3) 2-step integrated screening, which includes first and second trimester serum screening with or without nuchal translucency (integrated prenatal screen, serum integrated prenatal screening, contingent, and sequential). These options are reviewed, and recommendations are made. EVIDENCE: Studies published between 1982 and 2009 were retrieved through searches of PubMed or Medline and CINAHL and the Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (aneuploidy, Down syndrome, trisomy, prenatal screening, genetic health risk, genetic health surveillance, prenatal diagnosis). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and relevant observational studies. There were no language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to August 2010. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment- related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. The previous Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada guidelines regarding prenatal screening were also reviewed in developing this clinical practice guideline. VALUES: The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: This guideline is intended to reduce the number of prenatal invasive procedures done when maternal age is the only indication. This will have the benefit of reducing the numbers of normal pregnancies lost because of complications of invasive procedures. Any screening test has an inherent false- positive rate, which may result in undue anxiety. It is not possible at this time to undertake a detailed cost-benefit analysis of the implementation of this guideline, since this would require health surveillance and research and health resources not presently available; however, these factors need to be evaluated in a prospective approach by provincial and territorial initiatives.

Joint SOGC-CCMG Opinion for Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: An Update for All Canadian Providers of Maternity and Reproductive Healthcare in the Era of Direct-to-Consumer Testing.

OBJECTIVE: This guideline was written to update Canadian maternity care and reproductive healthcare providers on pre- and postconceptional reproductive carrier screening for women or couples who may be at risk of being carriers for autosomal recessive (AR), autosomal dominant (AD), or X-linked (XL) conditions, with risk of transmission to the fetus. Four previous SOGC- Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) guidelines are updated and merged into the current document. INTENDED USERS: All maternity care (most responsible health provider [MRHP]) and paediatric providers; maternity nursing; nurse practitioner; provincial maternity care administrator; medical student; and postgraduate resident year 1-7. TARGET POPULATION: Fertile, sexually active females and their fertile, sexually active male partners who are either planning a pregnancy or are pregnant (preferably in the first trimester of pregnancy, but any gestational age is acceptable). OPTIONS: Women and their partners will be able to obtain appropriate genetic carrier screening information and possible diagnosis of AR, AD, or XL disorders (preferably pre-conception), thereby allowing an informed choice regarding genetic carrier screening and reproductive options (e.g., prenatal diagnosis, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, egg or sperm donation, or adoption). OUTCOMES: Informed reproductive decisions related to genetic carrier screening and reproductive outcomes based on family history, ethnic background, past obstetrical history, known carrier status, or genetic diagnosis. SOGC REPRODUCTIVE CARRIER SCREENING SUMMARY STATEMENT (2016): Pre-conception or prenatal education and counselling for reproductive carrier screening requires a discussion about testing within the three perinatal genetic carrier screening/diagnosis time periods, which include pre-conception, prenatal, and neonatal for conditions currently being screened for and diagnosed. This new information should be added to the standard reproductive carrier screening protocols that are already being utilized by the most responsible maternity provider through the informed consent process with the patient. (III-A; GRADE low/moderate) SOGC OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS QUALITY AND GRADE: There was a strong observational/expert opinion (quality and grade) for the genetic carrier literature with randomized controlled trial evidence being available only for the invasive testing. Both the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care quality and classification and the GRADE evidence quality and grade are provided. EVIDENCE: MEDLINE; PubMed; government neonatal screening websites; key words/common reproductive genetic carrier screened diseases/previous SOGC Guidelines/medical academic societies (Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine [SMFM]; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics; American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG]; CCMG; Royal College Obstetrics and Gynaecology [RCOG] [UK]; American Society of Human Genetics [ASHG]; International Society of Prenatal Diagnosis [ISPD])/provincial neonatal screening policies and programs; search terms (carrier screening, prenatal screening, neonatal genetic/metabolic screening, cystic fibrosis (CF), thalassemia, hemoglobinopathy, hemophilia, Fragile X syndrome (FXS), spinal muscular atrophy, Ashkenazi Jewish carrier screening, genetic carrier screening protocols, AR, AD, XL). SEARCH PERIOD: 10 years (June 2005-September 2015); initial search dates June 30, 2015 and September 15, 2015; completed final search January 4, 2016. Validation of articles was completed by primary authors RD Wilson and I De Bie. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COST: Benefits are to provide an evidenced based reproductive genetic carrier screening update consensus based on international opinions and publications for the use of Canadian women, who are planning a pregnancy or who are pregnant and have been identified to be at risk (personal or male partner family or reproductive history) for the transmission of a clinically significant genetic condition to their offspring with associated morbidity and/or mortality. Harm may arise from having counselling and informed testing of the carrier status of the mother, their partner, or their fetus, as well as from declining to have this counselling and informed testing or from not having the opportunity for counselling and informed testing. Costs will ensue both from the provision of opportunities for counselling and testing, as well as when no such opportunities are offered or are declined and the birth of a child with a significant inherited condition and resulting morbidity/mortality occurs; these comprise not only the health care costs to the system but also the social/financial/psychological/emotional costs to the family. These recommendations are based on expert opinion and have not been subjected to a health economics assessment and local or provincial implementation will be required. GUIDELINE UPDATE: This guideline is an update of four previous joint SOGC-CCMG Genetic Screening Guidelines dated 2002, 2006, 2008, and 2008 developed by the SOGC Genetic Committee in collaboration with the CCMG Prenatal Diagnosis Committee (now Clinical Practice Committee). 2016 CARRIER SCREENING RECOMMENDATIONS.

Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy in singleton pregnancies.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a Canadian consensus document on maternal screening for fetal aneuploidy (e.g., Down syndrome and trisomy 18) in singleton pregnancies. OPTIONS: Pregnancy screening for fetal aneuploidy started in the mid 1960s, using maternal age as the screening test. New developments in maternal serum and ultrasound screening have made it possible to offer all pregnant patients a non-invasive screening test to assess their risk of having a fetus with aneuploidy to determine whether invasive prenatal diagnostic testing is necessary. This document reviews the options available for non-invasive screening and makes recommendations for Canadian patients and health care workers. OUTCOMES: To offer non-invasive screening for fetal aneuploidy (trisomy 13, 18, 21) to all pregnant women. Invasive prenatal diagnosis would be offered to women who screen above a set risk cut-off level on non-invasive screening or to pregnant women whose personal, obstetrical, or family history places them at increased risk. Currently available non-invasive screening options include maternal age combined with one of the following: (1) first trimester screening (nuchal translucency, maternal age, and maternal serum biochemical markers), (2) second trimester serum screening (maternal age and maternal serum biochemical markers), or (3) 2-step integrated screening, which includes first and second trimester serum screening with or without nuchal translucency (integrated prenatal screen, serum integrated prenatal screening, contingent, and sequential). These options are reviewed, and recommendations are made. EVIDENCE: Studies published between 1982 and 2009 were retrieved through searches of PubMed or Medline and CINAHL and the Cochrane Library, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (aneuploidy, Down syndrome, trisomy, prenatal screening, genetic health risk, genetic health surveillance, prenatal diagnosis). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and relevant observational studies. There were no language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to August 2010. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. The previous Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada guidelines regarding prenatal screening were also reviewed in developing this clinical practice guideline. VALUES: The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: This guideline is intended to reduce the number of prenatal invasive procedures done when maternal age is the only indication. This will have the benefit of reducing the numbers of normal pregnancies lost because of complications of invasive procedures. Any screening test has an inherent false-positive rate, which may result in undue anxiety. It is not possible at this time to undertake a detailed cost-benefit analysis of the implementation of this guideline, since this would require health surveillance and research and health resources not presently available; however, these factors need to be evaluated in a prospective approach by provincial and territorial initiatives. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. All pregnant women in Canada, regardless of age, should be offered, through an informed counselling process, the option of a prenatal screening test for the most common clinically significant fetal aneuploidies in addition to a second trimester ultrasound for dating, assessment of fetal anatomy, and detection of multiples. (I-A) 2. Counselling must be non-directive and must respect a woman's right to accept or decline any or all of the testing or options offered at any point in the process. (III-A) 3. Maternal age alone is a poor minimum standard for prenatal screening for aneuploidy, and it should not be used a basis for recommending invasive testing when non-invasive prenatal screening for aneuploidy is available. (II-2A) 4. Invasive prenatal diagnosis for cytogenetic analysis should not be performed without multiple marker screening results except for women who are at increased risk of fetal aneuploidy (a) because of ultrasound findings, (b) because the pregnancy was conceived by in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection, or (c) because the woman or her partner has a history of a previous child or fetus with a chromosomal abnormality or is a carrier of a chromosome rearrangement that increases the risk of having a fetus with a chromosomal abnormality. (II-2E) 5. At minimum, any prenatal screen offered to Canadian women who present for care in the first trimester should have a detection rate of 75% with no more than a 3% false-positive rate. The performance of the screen should be substantiated by annual audit. (III-B) 6. The minimum standard for women presenting in the second trimester should be a screen that has a detection rate of 75% with no more than a 5% false-positive rate. The performance of the screen should be substantiated by annual audit. (III-B) 7. First trimester nuchal translucency should be interpreted for risk assessment only when measured by sonographers or sonologists trained and accredited for this service and when there is ongoing quality assurance (II-2A), and it should not be offered as a screen without biochemical markers in singleton pregnancies. (I-E) 8. Evaluation of the fetal nasal bone in the first trimester should not be incorporated as a screen unless it is performed by sonographers or sonologists trained and accredited for this service and there is ongoing quality assurance. (II-2E) 9. For women who undertake first trimester screening, second trimester serum alpha fetoprotein screening and/or ultrasound examination is recommended to screen for open neural tube defects. (II-1A) 10. Timely referral and access is critical for women and should be facilitated to ensure women are able to undergo the type of screening test they have chosen as first trimester screening. The first steps of integrated screening (with or without nuchal translucency), contingent, or sequential screening are performed in an early and relatively narrow time window. (II-1A) 11. Ultrasound dating should be performed if menstrual or conception dating is unreliable. For any abnormal serum screen calculated on the basis of menstrual dating, an ultrasound should be done to confirm gestational age. (II-1A) 12. The presence or absence of soft markers or anomalies in the 18- to 20-week ultrasound can be used to modify the a priori risk of aneuploidy established by age or prior screening. (II-2B) 13. Information such as gestational dating, maternal weight, ethnicity, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, and use of assisted reproduction technologies should be provided to the laboratory to improve accuracy of testing. (II-2A) 14. Health care providers should be aware of the screening modalities available in their province or territory. (III-B) 15. A reliable system needs to be in place ensuring timely reporting of results. (III-C) 16. Screening programs should be implemented with resources that support audited screening and diagnostic laboratory services, ultrasound, genetic counselling services, patient and health care provider education, and high quality diagnostic testing, as well as resources for administration, annual clinical audit, and data management. In addition, there must be the flexibility and funding to adjust the program to new technology and protocols. (II-3B).

BBS genotype-phenotype assessment of a multiethnic patient cohort calls for a revision of the disease definition.

Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a ciliopathy characterized by retinal degeneration, obesity, polydactyly, renal abnormalities, and cognitive impairment for which 15 causative genes have been identified. Here we present the results of a mutational analysis of our multiethnic cohort of 83 families (105 cases); 75.9% of them have their mutations identified including 26 novel changes. Comprehensive phenotyping of these patients demonstrate that the spectrum of clinical features is greater than expected and overlapped with the features of other ciliopathies; specifically Alström and McKusick-Kauffman syndromes.

MRI of the fetal eyes: morphologic and biometric assessment for abnormal development with ultrasonographic and clinicopathologic correlation.

BACKGROUND: Currently ocular biometric measurements are defined by US and are measured from the orbital walls. These bony landmarks cannot be seen by MRI, and therefore these measurements cannot be directly applied. OBJECTIVE: To define measurements of normal growth of the fetal eyes using MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Transorbital views were analyzed in 198 fetal MR examinations. The ocular diameter (OD) and interocular and binocular distances (IOD and BOD) were measured and were plotted against gestational age. Fetuses with abnormalities affecting the eyes were evaluated separately. RESULTS: Of 198 scans, 146 had suitable images, 35 of which were abnormal. Normal growth of BOD, IOD and OD were determined, and compared with the respective already established US data. CONCLUSION: Normal growth charts were derived from a cohort of 111 normal fetuses. Because the margins of the vitreous are inside the bony orbit, at the same gestational age measurements of the BOD and OD are always less than the corresponding measurements by US, and those of the IOD are always more. Normal growth charts for MRI can now be used to support suspected diagnoses of orbital and ocular pathologies and the syndromes that give rise to them, and many examples are demonstrated.

The fetal cerebellar vermis: assessment for abnormal development by ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Fetal magnetic resonance provides a new tool in the imaging of the posterior fossa and is proving useful in cases that are difficult to assess sonographically by allowing further assessment of the fourth ventricle, cisterna magna, and vermian growth and development. We describe various criteria with which to evaluate vermian growth, including vermian biometry and the relationship between the superior and inferior lobes. We demonstrate 2 markers of normal vermian development: the primary fissure and fastigial point. We illustrate the tegmento-vermian angle, "closure" of the fourth ventricle, and communication of the fourth ventricle with the basal cisterns during development and in several disorders. We correlate those features with the expected embryological course of development and illustrate identification of these features and associated abnormalities of the posterior fossa, brain stem, and central nervous system in mid-trimester scans of fetuses with abnormal development. Correlation with contemporaneous ultrasound examinations is demonstrated.

Assessment of the thymus at echocardiography in fetuses at risk for 22q11.2 deletion.

OBJECTIVES: An absent or hypoplastic thymus is common in patients with 22q11.2 deletion (del22q11.2). We sought to determine whether fetal echocardiography could identify absence of the thymus as a diagnostic tool in pregnancies at risk for fetal del22q11.2. METHODS: We evaluated the fetal thymus in 16 consecutive pregnancies at risk for fetal del22q11. Fourteen of the fetuses had a conotruncal cardiac lesion, one had a twin with a conotruncal lesion, and in one the mother had a diagnosis of del22q11.2. The fetal thymus assessment was performed by an individual who was not aware of the del22q11.2 status of the fetus. RESULTS: By 2D imaging, the thymus was identified in the anterosuperior mediastinum as a subtle hypoechogenic area. In nine cases, the thymus was demonstrated prenatally and none had del22q11.2. However, in one case the thymus was only seen on follow-up fetal echocardiography. In six cases, the thymus could not be identified and all six had del22q11.2. In one additional case, analyzed retrospectively, the thymus could not be assessed. The status of the thymus was confirmed on postnatal echocardiography or autopsy in 11 of the 15 cases assessed prenatally. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that fetal echocardiography can assess the thymus in most cases at risk for del22q11.2. This information may be useful in counseling women/couples who decline amniocentesis or who are awaiting amniocentesis results.