RESUMO
Digital solutions are needed to support rapid increases in the application of genetic/genomic tests (GTs) in diverse clinical settings and patient populations. We developed GUÍA, a bilingual digital application that facilitates disclosure of GT results. The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial enrolled diverse children with neurologic, cardiac, and immunologic conditions who underwent GTs. The trial evaluated GUÍA's impact on understanding the GT results by randomizing families to results disclosure genetic counseling with GUÍA (intervention) or standard of care (SOC). Parents/legal guardians (participants) completed surveys at baseline, post-results disclosure, and 6 months later. Survey measures assessed the primary study outcomes of participants' perceived understanding of and confidence in explaining their child's GT results and the secondary outcome of objective understanding. The analysis included 551 diverse participants, 270 in the GUÍA arm and 281 in SOC. Participants in the GUÍA arm had significantly higher perceived understanding post-results (OR = 2.8, CI[1.004, 7.617], p = 0.049) and maintained higher objective understanding over time (OR = 1.1, CI[1.004, 1.127], p = 0.038) compared to SOC. There was no impact on perceived confidence. Hispanic/Latino(a) individuals in the GUÍA arm maintained higher perceived understanding (OR = 3.9, CI[1.603, 9.254], p = 0.003), confidence (OR = 2.7, CI[1.021, 7.277], p = 0.046), and objective understanding (OR = 1.1, CI[1.009, 1.212], p = 0.032) compared to SOC. This trial demonstrates that GUÍA positively impacts understanding of GT results in diverse parents of children with suspected genetic conditions and builds a case for utilizing GUÍA to deliver complex results. Continued development and evaluation of digital applications in diverse populations are critical for equitably scaling GT offerings in specialty clinics.
Assuntos
Revelação , Aconselhamento Genético , Criança , Humanos , Testes Genéticos , Pais , GenômicaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To better understand the effects of returning diagnostic sequencing results on clinical actions and economic outcomes for pediatric patients with suspected genetic disorders. METHODS: Longitudinal physician claims data after diagnostic sequencing were obtained for patients aged 0 to 21 years with neurologic, cardiac, and immunologic disorders with suspected genetic etiology. We assessed specialist consultation rates prompted by primary diagnostic results, as well as marginal effects on overall 18-month physician services and costs. RESULTS: We included data on 857 patients (median age: 9.6 years) with a median follow-up of 17.3 months after disclosure of diagnostic sequencing results. The likelihood of having ≥1 recommendation for specialist consultation in 155 patients with positive findings was high (72%) vs 23% in 443 patients with uncertain findings and 21% in 259 patients with negative findings (P < .001). Follow-through consultation occurred in 30%. Increases in 18-month physician services and costs following a positive finding diminished after multivariable adjustment. Also, no significant differences between those with uncertain and negative findings were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Our study did not provide evidence for significant increases in downstream physician services and costs after returning positive or uncertain diagnostic sequencing findings. More large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Assuntos
Revelação , Médicos , Humanos , Criança , Custos e Análise de CustoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Adoption of genome sequencing (GS) as a first-line test requires evaluation of its diagnostic yield. We evaluated the GS and targeted gene panel (TGP) testing in diverse pediatric patients (probands) with suspected genetic conditions. METHODS: Probands with neurologic, cardiac, or immunologic conditions were offered GS and TGP testing. Diagnostic yield was compared using a fully paired study design. RESULTS: A total of 645 probands (median age 9 years) underwent genetic testing, and 113 (17.5%) received a molecular diagnosis. Among 642 probands with both GS and TGP testing, GS yielded 106 (16.5%) and TGPs yielded 52 (8.1%) diagnoses (P < .001). Yield was greater for GS vs TGPs in Hispanic/Latino(a) (17.2% vs 9.5%, P < .001) and White/European American (19.8% vs 7.9%, P < .001) but not in Black/African American (11.5% vs 7.7%, P = .22) population groups by self-report. A higher rate of inconclusive results was seen in the Black/African American (63.8%) vs White/European American (47.6%; P = .01) population group. Most causal copy number variants (17 of 19) and mosaic variants (6 of 8) were detected only by GS. CONCLUSION: GS may yield up to twice as many diagnoses in pediatric patients compared with TGP testing but not yet across all population groups.
Assuntos
Predisposição Genética para Doença , Patologia Molecular , Humanos , Criança , Testes Genéticos/métodos , Sequência de Bases , Mapeamento CromossômicoRESUMO
Copy number variations (CNVs) play a significant role in human disease. While chromosomal microarray has traditionally been the first-tier test for CNV detection, use of genome sequencing (GS) is increasing. We report the frequency of CNVs detected with GS in a diverse pediatric cohort from the NYCKidSeq program and highlight specific examples of its clinical impact. A total of 1052 children (0-21 years) with neurodevelopmental, cardiac, and/or immunodeficiency phenotypes received GS. Phenotype-driven analysis was used, resulting in 183 (17.4%) participants with a diagnostic result. CNVs accounted for 20.2% of participants with a diagnostic result (37/183) and ranged from 0.5 kb to 16 Mb. Of participants with a diagnostic result (n = 183) and phenotypes in more than one category, 5/17 (29.4%) were solved by a CNV finding, suggesting a high prevalence of diagnostic CNVs in participants with complex phenotypes. Thirteen participants with a diagnostic CNV (35.1%) had previously uninformative genetic testing, of which nine included a chromosomal microarray. This study demonstrates the benefits of GS for reliable detection of CNVs in a pediatric cohort with variable phenotypes.
Assuntos
Variações do Número de Cópias de DNA , Testes Genéticos , Humanos , Criança , Variações do Número de Cópias de DNA/genética , Mapeamento Cromossômico/métodos , Testes Genéticos/métodos , Fenótipo , Análise em MicrossériesRESUMO
The increased use of next-generation sequencing has expanded our understanding of the involvement and prevalence of mosaicism in genetic disorders. We describe a total of eleven cases: nine in which mosaic variants detected by genome sequencing (GS) and/or targeted gene panels (TGPs) were considered to be causative for the proband's phenotype, and two of apparent parental mosaicism. Variants were identified in the following genes: PHACTR1, SCN8A, KCNT1, CDKL5, NEXMIF, CUX1, TSC2, GABRB2, and SMARCB1. In addition, we identified one large duplication including three genes, UBE3A, GABRB3, and MAGEL2, and one large deletion including deletion of ARFGAP1, EEF1A2, CHRNA4, and KCNQ2. All patients were enrolled in the NYCKidSeq study, a research program studying the communication of genomic information in clinical care, as well as the clinical utility and diagnostic yield of GS for children with suspected genetic disorders in diverse populations in New York City. We observed variability in the correlation between reported variant allele fraction and the severity of the patient's phenotype, although we were not able to determine the mosaicism percentage in clinically relevant tissue(s). Although our study was not sufficiently powered to assess differences in mosaicism detection between the two testing modalities, we saw a trend toward better detection by GS as compared with TGP testing. This case series supports the importance of mosaicism in childhood-onset genetic conditions and informs guidelines for laboratory and clinical interpretation of mosaic variants detected by GS.
Assuntos
Espasmos Infantis , Humanos , Alelos , Fenótipo , Mosaicismo , Sequenciamento de Nucleotídeos em Larga Escala , Proteínas , Fator 1 de Elongação de Peptídeos , Proteínas Ativadoras de GTPase , Canais de Potássio Ativados por Sódio , Proteínas do Tecido NervosoRESUMO
PURPOSE: As polygenic risk scores (PRS) emerge as promising tools to inform clinical care, there is a pressing need for patient-centered evidence to guide their implementation, particularly in diverse populations. Here, we conducted in-depth interviews of diverse Spanish- and English-speaking patients to explore their perspectives on clinical PRS. METHODS: We enrolled 30 biobank participants aged 35-50 years through a purposive sampling strategy, ensuring that >75% self-reported as African/African American or Hispanic/Latinx and half were Spanish-speaking. Semistructured interviews in Spanish or English explored attitudes toward PRS, barriers to adoption, and communication preferences. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Perceived utility of clinical PRS focused on the potential for personal health benefits, and most participants stated that high-risk results would prompt physician consultations and health behavior changes. There was little concern among participants about the limited predictive power of PRS for non-European populations. Barriers to uptake of PRS testing and adoption of PRS-related recommendations included socioeconomic factors, insurance status, race, ethnicity, language, and inadequate understanding of PRS. Participants favored in-person PRS result disclosure by their physician. CONCLUSION: Findings provide valuable insight into diverse patients' attitudes and potential barriers related to clinical PRS, guiding future research and patient-centered clinical implementation.
Assuntos
Negro ou Afro-Americano , Testes Genéticos , Hispânico ou Latino , Idioma , Humanos , Negro ou Afro-Americano/genética , Hispânico ou Latino/genética , Fatores de Risco , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em SaúdeRESUMO
PURPOSE: Making a diagnosis from clinical genomic sequencing requires well-structured phenotypic data to guide genotype interpretation. A patient's phenotypic features can be documented using the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO), generating terms used to prioritize genes potentially causing the patient's disease. We have developed GenomeDiver to provide a user interface for clinicians that allows more effective collaboration with the clinical diagnostic laboratory, with the goal of improving the success of the diagnostic process. METHODS: GenomeDiver uses genomic data to prompt reverse phenotyping of patients undergoing genetic testing, enriching the amount and quality of structured phenotype data for the diagnostic laboratory, and helping clinicians to explore and flag diseases potentially causing their patient's presentation. RESULTS: We show how GenomeDiver communicates the clinician's informed insights to the diagnostic lab in the form of HPO terms for interpretation of genomic sequencing data. We describe our user-driven design process, the engineering of the software for efficiency, security and portability, and examples of the performance of GenomeDiver using genomic testing data. CONCLUSION: GenomeDiver is a first step in a new approach to genomic diagnostics that enhances laboratory-clinician interactions, with the goal of directly engaging clinicians to improve the outcome of genomic diagnostic testing.
Assuntos
Genômica , Software , Testes Genéticos , Genótipo , Humanos , FenótipoRESUMO
The descriptor 'usual care' refers to standard or routine care. Yet, no formal definition exists. The need to define what constitutes usual care arises in clinical research. Often one arm in a trial represents usual care in comparison with a novel intervention. Accordingly, usual care in genetic counseling research appears predominantly in randomized controlled trials. Recent standards for reporting genetic counseling research call for standardization, but do not address usual care. We (1) inventoried all seven studies in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Consortium (CSER) about how genetic counseling was conceptualized, conducted, and whether a usual care arm was involved; (2) conducted a review of published randomized control trials in genetic counseling, comparing how researchers describe usual care groups; and (3) reviewed existing professionally endorsed definitions and practice descriptions of genetic counseling. We found wide variation in the content and delivery of usual care. Descriptions frequently detailed the content of usual care, most often noting assessment of genetic risk factors, collecting family histories, and offering testing. A minority included addressing psychological concerns or the risks versus benefits of testing. Descriptions of how care was delivered were vague except for mode and type of clinician, which varied. This significant variation, beyond differences expected among subspecialties, reduces the validity and generalizability of genetic counseling research. Ideally, research reflects clinical practice so that evidence generated can be used to improve clinical outcomes. To address this objective, we propose a definition of usual care in genetic counseling research that merges common elements from the National Society of Genetic Counselors' practice definition, the Reciprocal Engagement Model, and the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counselors' practice-based competencies. Promoting consistent execution of usual care in the design of genetic counseling trials can lead to more consistency in representing clinical care and facilitate the generation of evidence to improve it.
Assuntos
Aconselhamento , Aconselhamento Genético , Acreditação , HumanosRESUMO
There is increasing evidence of the clinical utility of genetic and genomic testing (GT); however, factors influencing personal utility of GT, especially in diverse, multilingual populations, remain unclear. We explored these factors in a diverse cohort of parents/guardians (participants) whose children received clinical GT through the NYCKidSeq program. A total of 847 participants completed surveys at baseline, post-results disclosure, and 6 months (6m) post-results. The largest population groups were Hispanic/Latino(a) (48%), White/European American (24%), and Black/African American (16%). Personal utility was assessed using the Personal Utility (PrU) scale, adapted for pediatric populations and included on the surveys. Three PrU subscales were identified using factor analysis: practical, educational, and parental psychological utility. Overall personal utility summary score and the three subscales significantly decreased after receiving results and over time. Hispanic/Latino(a) participants identified greater overall personal utility than European American and African American participants at all time points (p < 0.001) as did participants whose children received positive/likely positive results compared with those with negative and uncertain results (post-results: p < 0.001 and p < 0.001; 6m post-results: p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). Post-results, higher subscale scores were associated with lower education levels (practical, parental psychological: p ≤ 0.02) and higher levels of trust in the healthcare system (practical, parental psychological: p ≤ 0.04). These findings help to understand the perspectives of diverse parents/guardians, which is critical to tailoring pre- and post-test counseling across a variety of populations and clinical settings.
Assuntos
Testes Genéticos , Pais , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Genômica , Hispânico ou Latino/genética , Multilinguismo , Inquéritos e Questionários , Brancos/genética , Negro ou Afro-Americano/genéticaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced healthcare institutions and many clinical research programs to adopt telehealth modalities in order to mitigate viral spread. With the expanded use of telehealth, there is the potential to increase access to genomic medicine to medically underserved populations, yet little is known about how best to communicate genomic results via telehealth while also ensuring equitable access. NYCKidSeq, a multi-institutional clinical genomics research program in New York City, launched the TeleKidSeq pilot study to assess alternative forms of genomic communication and telehealth service delivery models with families from medically underserved populations. METHODS: We aim to enroll 496 participants between 0 and 21 years old to receive clinical genome sequencing. These individuals have a neurologic, cardiovascular, and/or immunologic disease. Participants will be English- or Spanish-speaking and predominantly from underrepresented groups who receive care in the New York metropolitan area. Prior to enrollment, participants will be randomized to either genetic counseling via videoconferencing with screen-sharing or genetic counseling via videoconferencing without screen-sharing. Using surveys administered at baseline, results disclosure, and 6-months post-results disclosure, we will evaluate the impact of the use of screen-sharing on participant understanding, satisfaction, and uptake of medical recommendations, as well as the psychological and socioeconomic implications of obtaining genome sequencing. Clinical utility, cost, and diagnostic yield of genome sequencing will also be assessed. DISCUSSION: The TeleKidSeq pilot study will contribute to innovations in communicating genomic test results to diverse populations through telehealth technology. In conjunction with NYCKidSeq, this work will inform best practices for the implementation of genomic medicine in diverse, English- and Spanish-speaking populations.
RESUMO
Background: Digital solutions are needed to support rapid increases in the application of genetic and genomic tests (GT) in diverse clinical settings and patient populations. We developed GUÍA, a bi-lingual web-based platform that facilitates disclosure of GT results. The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial evaluated GUÍA's impact on understanding of GT results. Methods: NYCKidSeq enrolled diverse children with neurologic, cardiac, and immunologic conditions who underwent GT. Families were randomized to genetic counseling with GUÍA (intervention) or standard of care (SOC) genetic counseling for results disclosure. Parents/legal guardians (participants) completed surveys at baseline, post-results disclosure, and 6-months later. Survey measures assessed the primary study outcomes of perceived understanding of and confidence in explaining their child's GT results and the secondary outcome of objective understanding. We used regression models to evaluate the association between the intervention and the study outcomes. Results: The analysis included 551 participants, 270 in the GUÍA arm and 281 in SOC. Participants' mean age was 41.1 years and 88.6% were mothers. Most participants were Hispanic/Latino(a) (46.3%), White/European American (24.5%), or Black/African American (15.8%). Participants in the GUÍA arm had significantly higher perceived understanding post-results (OR=2.8, CI[1.004,7.617], P=0.049) and maintained higher objective understanding over time (OR=1.1, CI[1.004, 1.127], P=0.038) compared to those in the SOC arm. There was no impact on perceived confidence. Hispanic/Latino(a) individuals in the GUÍA arm maintained higher perceived understanding (OR=3.9, CI[1.6, 9.3], P=0.003), confidence (OR=2.7, CI[1.021, 7.277], P=0.046), and objective understanding (OR=1.1, CI[1.009, 1.212], P=0.032) compared to SOC . Conclusions: This trial demonstrates that GUÍA positively impacts understanding of GT results in diverse parents of children with suspected genetic conditions. These findings build a case for utilizing GUÍA to deliver complex and often ambiguous genetic results. Continued development and evaluation of digital applications in diverse populations are critical for equitably scaling GT offerings in specialty clinics. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03738098.
RESUMO
Purpose: Adoption of genome sequencing (GS) as a first-line test requires evaluation of its diagnostic yield. We evaluated the GS and targeted gene panel (TGP) testing in diverse pediatric patients (probands) with suspected genetic conditions. Methods: Probands with neurologic, cardiac, or immunologic conditions were offered GS and TGP testing. Diagnostic yield was compared using a fully paired study design. Results: 645 probands (median age 9 years) underwent genetic testing, and 113 (17.5%) received a molecular diagnosis. Among 642 probands with both GS and TGP testing, GS yielded 106 (16.5%) and TGPs yielded 52 (8.1%) diagnoses ( P < .001). Yield was greater for GS vs . TGPs in Hispanic/Latino(a) (17.2% vs . 9.5%, P < .001) and White/European American (19.8% vs . 7.9%, P < .001), but not in Black/African American (11.5% vs . 7.7%, P = .22) population groups by self-report. A higher rate of inconclusive results was seen in the Black/African American (63.8%) vs . White/European American (47.6%; P = .01) population group. Most causal copy number variants (17 of 19) and mosaic variants (6 of 8) were detected only by GS. Conclusion: GS may yield up to twice as many diagnoses in pediatric patients compared to TGP testing, but not yet across all population groups.
RESUMO
Genetic counselors are trained to deliver complicated genomic test results to parents of pediatric patients. However, there is limited knowledge on how parents perceive this information and what they understand about the results. This research aims to qualitatively explore parents' experiences receiving genomic test results for their children. As part of formative research for the NYCKidSeq Study, we recruited a purposive sample of parents of 22 children stratified by child race/ethnicity and test result classification (positive, uncertain, or negative) and conducted in-depth interviews using a semi-structured guide. Analysis was conducted using grounded theory's constant comparative method across cases and themes. Parents described different elements of understanding: genetics knowledge; significance and meaning of positive, uncertain, or negative results; and implications for the health of their child and family. Parents reported challenges understanding technical details and significance of their child's results but gladly allowed their providers to be custodians of this information. However, of the different elements of understanding described, parents cared most deeply about being able to understand implications for their child's and family's health. These findings suggest that a counseling approach that primarily addresses parents' desire to understand how to best care for their child and family may be more appropriate than an information-heavy approach focused on technical details. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in larger parent cohorts and to explore ways genetic counseling can support parents' preferences without sacrificing important components of parent understanding and overall satisfaction with their experiences with genomic medicine.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Genomics is increasingly used for diagnostic testing in children. This study describes the expectations of parents whose child received genomic testing and whether or not they were met. METHODS: A diverse stratified, purposive sample of parents of 22 children in New York City was interviewed using a semi-structured guide. Genomic test results were positive, negative, or uncertain. RESULTS: Parents expressed their expectations in narrative and numeric fashion. Parents expected that their child's test would have a direct effect on their child's diagnosis. Some believed that results would be definitive, while others recognized testing limitations. Expectations reflected parents' hope to find a diagnosis and led to disappointment when results were uninformative or did not impact clinical management. CONCLUSION: Results suggest pre-test genetic counseling emphasize the low likelihood of actionable results; however, parents' expectations of genomics' diagnostic capabilities are strongly rooted in their need to end the diagnostic odyssey and may be difficult to manage. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Parents' hope for a resolution and effective treatment for their child is a powerful context in which genetic counseling is heard. Clinicians who provide genomic testing should continue to acknowledge parents' preconceptions. Additional research in other settings will help understand how to best address and manage parent expectations of genomic medicine.
Assuntos
Motivação , Pais , Criança , Aconselhamento Genético , Testes Genéticos , Humanos , Cidade de Nova IorqueRESUMO
Genomic sequencing results need to be effectively communicated across all populations and practice settings. Projects in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium enroll diverse racial/ethnic and medically underserved participants across various clinical contexts. This article explores a set of CSER results disclosure cases to expand the evidence base on experiences returning genomic results. Case details were collected using a structured set of questions. We identified common themes in the case set, and assessed challenges and strategies in achieving six relevant results disclosure objectives. CSER-affiliated patient/community stakeholder impressions of the findings were solicited via video conference calls. Seventeen cases across six CSER projects were included. Case themes sorted into four categories: (1) factors influencing participant understanding, (2) participant emotional response, (3) disease burden, and (4) logistical challenges. Challenges meeting results disclosure objectives included a lack of dialogue, health literacy level, unexpected findings, and complex concepts. Strategies were consistent with traditional genetic counseling practice, but also highlighted approaches being evaluated in CSER projects. Patient/community stakeholders supported the identified themes and provided additional suggestions to improve patient understanding and engagement. These experiences add valuable insights into adapting genomic results disclosure practices to best serve all patient populations.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Increasingly, genomics is informing clinical practice, but challenges remain for medical professionals lacking genetics expertise, and in access to and clinical utility of genomic testing for minority and underrepresented populations. The latter is a particularly pernicious problem due to the historical lack of inclusion of racially and ethnically diverse populations in genomic research and genomic medicine. A further challenge is the rapidly changing landscape of genetic tests and considerations of cost, interpretation, and diagnostic yield for emerging modalities like whole-genome sequencing. METHODS: The NYCKidSeq project is a randomized controlled trial recruiting 1130 children and young adults predominantly from Harlem and the Bronx with suspected genetic disorders in three disease categories: neurologic, cardiovascular, and immunologic. Two clinical genetic tests will be performed for each participant, either proband, duo, or trio whole-genome sequencing (depending on sample availability) and proband targeted gene panels. Clinical utility, cost, and diagnostic yield of both testing modalities will be assessed. This study will evaluate the use of a novel, digital platform (GUÍA) to digitize the return of genomic results experience and improve participant understanding for English- and Spanish-speaking families. Surveys will collect data at three study visits: baseline (0 months), result disclosure visit (ROR1, + 3 months), and follow-up visit (ROR2, + 9 months). Outcomes will assess parental understanding of and attitudes toward receiving genomic results for their child and behavioral, psychological, and social impact of results. We will also conduct a pilot study to assess a digital tool called GenomeDiver designed to enhance communication between clinicians and genetic testing labs. We will evaluate GenomeDiver's ability to increase the diagnostic yield compared to standard practices, improve clinician's ability to perform targeted reverse phenotyping, and increase the efficiency of genetic testing lab personnel. DISCUSSION: The NYCKidSeq project will contribute to the innovations and best practices in communicating genomic test results to diverse populations. This work will inform strategies for implementing genomic medicine in health systems serving diverse populations using methods that are clinically useful, technologically savvy, culturally sensitive, and ethically sound. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03738098 . Registered on November 13, 2018 Trial Sponsor: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Contact Name: Eimear Kenny, PhD (Principal Investigator) Address: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Pl., Box 1003, New York, NY 10029 Email: eimear.kenny@mssm.edu.
Assuntos
Testes Genéticos , Genômica , Criança , Humanos , Cidade de Nova Iorque , Pais , Projetos Piloto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Receptores Órfãos Semelhantes a Receptor Tirosina Quinase , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) lead to increased risk of breast, ovarian, and other cancers, but most variant-positive individuals in the general population are unaware of their risk, and little is known about prevalence in non-European populations. We investigated BRCA1/2 prevalence and impact in the electronic health record (EHR)-linked BioMe Biobank in New York City. METHODS: Exome sequence data from 30,223 adult BioMe participants were evaluated for pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2. Prevalence estimates were made in population groups defined by genetic ancestry and self-report. EHR data were used to evaluate clinical characteristics of variant-positive individuals. RESULTS: There were 218 (0.7%) individuals harboring expected pathogenic variants, resulting in an overall prevalence of 1 in 139. The highest prevalence was in individuals with Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ; 1 in 49), Filipino and other Southeast Asian (1 in 81), and non-AJ European (1 in 103) ancestry. Among 218 variant-positive individuals, 112 (51.4%) harbored known founder variants: 80 had AJ founder variants (BRCA1 c.5266dupC and c.68_69delAG, and BRCA2 c.5946delT), 8 had a Puerto Rican founder variant (BRCA2 c.3922G>T), and 24 had one of 19 other founder variants. Non-European populations were more likely to harbor BRCA1/2 variants that were not classified in ClinVar or that had uncertain or conflicting evidence for pathogenicity (uncertain/conflicting). Within mixed ancestry populations, such as Hispanic/Latinos with genetic ancestry from Africa, Europe, and the Americas, there was a strong correlation between the proportion of African genetic ancestry and the likelihood of harboring an uncertain/conflicting variant. Approximately 28% of variant-positive individuals had a personal history, and 45% had a personal or family history of BRCA1/2-associated cancers. Approximately 27% of variant-positive individuals had prior clinical genetic testing for BRCA1/2. However, individuals with AJ founder variants were twice as likely to have had a clinical test (39%) than those with other pathogenic variants (20%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings deepen our knowledge about BRCA1/2 variants and associated cancer risk in diverse populations, indicate a gap in knowledge about potential cancer-related variants in non-European populations, and suggest that genomic screening in diverse patient populations may be an effective tool to identify at-risk individuals.