Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Country/Region as subject
Language
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
Genet Med ; 26(2): 101012, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37924259

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of publicly funded clinical exome sequencing (ES) for patients with suspected rare genetic diseases. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 297 probands who met eligibility criteria and received ES across 5 sites in Ontario, Canada, and extracted data from medical records and clinician surveys. Using the Fryback and Thornbury Efficacy Framework, we assessed diagnostic accuracy by examining laboratory interpretation of results and assessed diagnostic thinking by examining the clinical interpretation of results and whether clinical-molecular diagnoses would have been achieved via alternative hypothetical molecular tests. RESULTS: Laboratories reported 105 molecular diagnoses and 165 uncertain results in known and novel genes. Of these, clinicians interpreted 102 of 105 (97%) molecular diagnoses and 6 of 165 (4%) uncertain results as clinical-molecular diagnoses. The 108 clinical-molecular diagnoses were in 104 families (35% diagnostic yield). Each eligibility criteria resulted in diagnostic yields of 30% to 40%, and higher yields were achieved when >2 eligibility criteria were met (up to 45%). Hypothetical tests would have identified 61% of clinical-molecular diagnoses. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate robustness in eligibility criteria and high clinical validity of laboratory results from ES testing. The importance of ES was highlighted by the potential 40% of patients that would have gone undiagnosed without this test.


Subject(s)
Exome , Rare Diseases , Humans , Prospective Studies , Exome Sequencing , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Rare Diseases/genetics , Genetic Testing/methods , Ontario
2.
BMJ Open ; 14(9): e090084, 2024 Sep 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39231549

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Genetic testing is used across medical disciplines leading to unprecedented demand for genetic services. This has resulted in excessive waitlists and unsustainable pressure on the standard model of genetic healthcare. Alternative models are needed; e-health tools represent scalable and evidence-based solution. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the Genetics Navigator, an interactive patient-centred digital platform that supports the collection of medical and family history, provision of pregenetic and postgenetic counselling and return of genetic testing results across paediatric and adult settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will evaluate the effectiveness of the Genetics Navigator combined with usual care by a genetics clinician (physician or counsellor) to usual care alone in a randomised controlled trial. One hundred and thirty participants (adults patients or parents of paediatric patients) eligible for genetic testing through standard of care will be recruited across Ontario genetics clinics. Participants randomised into the intervention arm will use the Genetics Navigator for pretest and post-test genetic counselling and results disclosure in conjunction with their clinician. Participants randomised into the control arm will receive usual care, that is, clinician-delivered pretest and post-test genetic counselling, and results disclosure. The primary outcome is participant distress 2 weeks after test results disclosure. Secondary outcomes include knowledge, decisional conflict, anxiety, empowerment, quality of life, satisfaction, acceptability, digital health literacy and health resource use. Quantitative data will be analysed using statistical hypothesis tests and regression models. A subset of participants will be interviewed to explore user experience; data will be analysed using interpretive description. A cost-effectiveness analysis will examine the incremental cost of the Navigator compared with usual care per unit reduction in distress or unit improvement in quality of life from public payer and societal perspectives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario. Results will be shared through stakeholder workshops, national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06455384.


Subject(s)
Genetic Counseling , Humans , Genetic Counseling/methods , Adult , Child , Genetic Testing/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Quality of Life , Ontario , Canada , Patient Navigation
3.
Children (Basel) ; 8(4)2021 Mar 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33801725

ABSTRACT

In genomics, perceived and personal utility have been proposed as constructs of value that include the subjective meanings and uses of genetic testing. Precisely what constitutes these constructs of utility and how they vary by stakeholder perspective remains unresolved. To advance methods for measuring the value of genetic testing in child health, we conducted a scoping review of the literature to characterize utility from the perspective of parents/caregivers. Peer reviewed literature that included empiric findings from parents/caregivers who received genetic test results for an index child and was written in English from 2016-2020 was included. Identified concepts of utility were coded according to Kohler's construct of personal utility. Of 2142 abstracts screened, 33 met inclusion criteria. Studies reflected a range of genetic test types; the majority of testing was pursued for children with developmental or neurodevelopmental concerns. Coding resulted in 15 elements of utility that mapped to Kohler's four domains of personal utility (affective, cognitive, behavioural and social) and one additional medical management domain. An adapted construct of utility for parents/caregivers may enable specific and standardized strategies for researchers to use to generate evidence of the post-test value of genetic testing. In turn, this will contribute to emerging methods for health technology assessment and policy decision making for genomics in child health.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL