Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Rise of Population Genomic Screening: Characteristics of Current Programs and the Need for Evidence Regarding Optimal Implementation.
Foss, Kimberly S; O'Daniel, Julianne M; Berg, Jonathan S; Powell, Sabrina N; Cadigan, Rosemary Jean; Kuczynski, Kristine J; Milko, Laura V; Saylor, Katherine W; Roberts, Megan; Weck, Karen; Henderson, Gail E.
Affiliation
  • Foss KS; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • O'Daniel JM; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Berg JS; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Powell SN; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Cadigan RJ; Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Kuczynski KJ; Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Milko LV; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Saylor KW; Department of Public Policy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Roberts M; Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Weck K; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
  • Henderson GE; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
J Pers Med ; 12(5)2022 Apr 26.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35629115
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Advances in clinical genomic sequencing capabilities, including reduced costs and knowledge gains, have bolstered the consideration of genomic screening in healthy adult populations. Yet, little is known about the existing landscape of genomic screening programs in the United States. It can be difficult to find information on current implementation efforts and best practices, particularly in light of critical questions about equity, cost, and benefit.

METHODS:

In 2020, we searched publicly available information on the Internet and the scientific literature to identify programs and collect information, including setting, program funding, targeted population, test offered, and patient cost. Program representatives were contacted throughout 2020 and 2021 to clarify, update, and supplement the publicly available information.

RESULTS:

Twelve programs were identified. Information was available on key program features, such as setting, genes tested, and target populations. Data on costs, outcomes, or long-term sustainability plans were not always available. Most programs offered testing at no or significantly reduced cost due to generous pilot funding, although the sustainability of these programs remains unknown. Gene testing lists were diverse, ranging from 11 genes (CDC tier 1 genes) to 59 genes (ACMG secondary findings list v.2) to broad exome and genome sequencing. This diversity presents challenges for harmonized data collection and assessment of program outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS:

Early programs are exploring the logistics and utility of population genomic screening in various settings. Coordinated efforts are needed to take advantage of data collected about uptake, infrastructure, and intervention outcomes to inform future research, evaluation, and program development.
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies / Sysrev_observational_studies Language: En Journal: J Pers Med Year: 2022 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies / Sysrev_observational_studies Language: En Journal: J Pers Med Year: 2022 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States