The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial: Impact of GUÍA digitally enhanced genetic results disclosure in diverse families.

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.

Satisfaction with Mode of Delivery of Genomic Sequencing Results in a Diverse National Sample of Research Participants through the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium.

PURPOSE: Research that includes diverse patient populations is necessary to optimize implementation of telehealth. METHODS: As part of a Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium cross-site study, we assessed satisfaction with mode of return of results (RoR) delivery across a diverse sample of participants receiving genetic testing results in-person (IP) versus telemedicine (TM) RESULTS: Ninety-eight percent of participants were satisfied with their mode of results delivery. Participants receiving results by TM were more likely to report a preference for receiving results in a different way and challenges with providers noticing difficulties with understanding. Greater than 90% reported satisfaction across all items measuring support and interaction during sessions. Participants self-reporting Hispanic/Latino or Black/African American race/ethnicity compared to White/European American, fewer years of education, and having lower health literacy were more likely to report challenges with understanding the information or asking questions. Participants who were White/European American, had more years of education, and higher health literacy reported higher communication scores reflecting more positive evaluations of the communication experience. CONCLUSION: TM is an acceptable mode of RoR delivery across diverse settings and populations. Research optimizing approaches for underrepresented populations, populations with lower levels of education and health literacy, and multilingual populations is necessary.

Physician services and costs after disclosure of diagnostic sequencing results in the NYCKidSeq program.

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.

Molecular diagnostic yield of genome sequencing versus targeted gene panel testing in racially and ethnically diverse pediatric patients.

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.

Identification of copy number variants with genome sequencing: Clinical experiences from the NYCKidSeq program.

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.

Detection of mosaic variants using genome sequencing in a large pediatric cohort.

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.

Elective genetic testing: Genetics professionals' perspectives and practices.

Elective genetic testing (EGT) to identify disease risk in individuals who may or may not meet clinical criteria for testing is increasingly being offered in clinical practice. However, little is known about how EGT is currently implemented and how genetics professionals perceive this type of testing. We conducted a mixed-methods survey study to evaluate genetics professionals' perspectives and attitudes about EGT and describe the current landscape of EGT practices in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. Six clinical geneticists and 131 genetic counselors responded to the online survey, among whom 44% reported offering EGT in their practice. Over 84% of survey respondents agreed that EGT may improve health outcomes and understanding of genotype-phenotype correlations, and 85% agreed that potential risks include result misinterpretation and contribution to economic health disparities. Though most respondents felt comfortable providing pretest (77%) and post-test (86%) counseling for EGT, lack of provider resources (such as time and personnel) and prioritization of diagnostic testing were cited most frequently in free-text responses as reasons for not offering EGT. Of those offering EGT, 88% reported positive overall experiences. Qualitative analysis of open-ended questions identified benefits of EGT as expanding access to genetic testing, providing potential health benefits, and providing psychological benefits for patients. Disadvantages included prohibitive costs, limited clinical utility, and strain on resources. Overall, we found that genetics providers perceive both potential benefits and harms of EGT and that those offering this testing had generally positive experiences, although ethical reservations and practical limitations exist.

Clinical genetic counseling and translation considerations for polygenic scores in personalized risk assessments: A Practice Resource from the National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Polygenic scores (PGS) are primed for use in personalized risk assessments for common, complex conditions and population health screening. Although there is growing evidence supporting the clinical validity of these scores in certain diseases, presently, there is no consensus on best practices for constructing PGS or demonstrated clinical utility in practice. Despite these evidence gaps, individuals can access their PGS information through commercial entities, research programs, and clinical programs. This prompts the immediate need for educational resources for clinicians encountering PGS information in clinical practice. This practice resource is intended to increase genetic counselors' and other healthcare providers' understanding and comfort with PGS used in personalized risk assessments. Drawing on best practices in clinical genomics, we discuss the unique considerations for polygenic-based (1) testing, (2) clinical genetic counseling, and (3) translation to population health services. This practice resource outlines the emerging uses of PGS, as well as the critical limitations of this technology that need to be addressed before wide-scale implementation.

Perspectives of diverse Spanish- and English-speaking patients on the clinical use of polygenic risk scores.

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.

GenomeDiver: a platform for phenotype-guided medical genomic diagnosis.

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.

GUÍA: a digital platform to facilitate result disclosure in genetic counseling.

PURPOSE: Use of genomic sequencing is increasing at a pace that requires technological solutions to effectively meet the needs of a growing patient population. We developed GUÍA, a web-based application, to enhance the delivery of genomic results and related clinical information to patients and families. METHODS: GUÍA development occurred in five overlapping phases: formative research, content development, stakeholder/community member input, user interface design, and web application development. Development was informed by formative qualitative research involving parents (N = 22) whose children underwent genomic testing. Participants enrolled in the NYCKidSeq pilot study (N = 18) completed structured feedback interviews post-result disclosure using GUÍA. Genetic specialists, researchers, patients, and community stakeholders provided their perspectives on GUÍA's design to ensure technical, cultural, and literacy appropriateness. RESULTS: NYCKidSeq participants responded positively to the use of GUÍA to deliver their children's results. All participants (N = 10) with previous experience with genetic testing felt GUÍA improved result disclosure, and 17 (94%) participants said the content was clear. CONCLUSION: GUÍA communicates complex genomic information in an understandable and personalized manner. Initial piloting demonstrated GUÍA's utility for families enrolled in the NYCKidSeq pilot study. Findings from the NYCKidSeq clinical trial will provide insight into GUÍA's effectiveness in communicating results among diverse, multilingual populations.

A review and definition of 'usual care' in genetic counseling trials to standardize use in research.

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.

Development and preliminary evaluation of an online educational video about whole-genome sequencing for research participants, patients, and the general public.

BACKGROUND: As whole-genome sequencing (WGS) increases in availability, WGS educational aids are needed for research participants, patients, and the general public. Our aim was therefore to develop an accessible and scalable WGS educational aid. METHODS: We engaged multiple stakeholders in an iterative process over a 1-year period culminating in the production of a novel 10-minute WGS educational animated video, "Whole Genome Sequencing and You" (https://goo.gl/HV8ezJ). We then presented the animated video to 281 online-survey respondents (the video-information group). There were also two comparison groups: a written-information group (n = 281) and a no-information group (n = 300). RESULTS: In the video-information group, 79% reported the video was easy to understand, satisfaction scores were high (mean 4.00 on 1-5 scale, where 5 = high satisfaction), and knowledge increased significantly. There were significant differences in knowledge compared with the no-information group but few differences compared with the written-information group. Intention to receive personal results from WGS and decisional conflict in response to a hypothetical scenario did not differ between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The educational animated video, "Whole Genome Sequencing and You," was well received by this sample of online-survey respondents. Further work is needed to evaluate its utility as an aid to informed decision making about WGS in other populations.Genet Med 18 5, 501-512.

Impact of Genomic Counseling on Informed Decision-Making among ostensibly Healthy Individuals Seeking Personal Genome Sequencing: the HealthSeq Project.

Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of 'genomic counseling' on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants' informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants' satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = -4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.

Evaluating parental personal utility of pediatric genetic and genomic testing in a diverse, multilingual population.

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 scale (PrU), 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 timepoints (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 <0.001; 6m post-results: p=0.002 and <0.001, respectively). Post-results, higher utility 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.

The NYCKidSeq randomized controlled trial: Impact of GUÍA digitally enhanced genetic counseling in racially and ethnically diverse families.

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.

Molecular diagnostic yield of genome sequencing versus targeted gene panel testing in racially and ethnically diverse pediatric patients.

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.

The TeleKidSeq pilot study: incorporating telehealth into clinical care of children from diverse backgrounds undergoing whole genome sequencing.

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.

Genomic Screening Identifies Individuals at High Risk for Hereditary Transthyretin Amyloidosis.

The TTR V142I variant associated with hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR) is present in up to 4% of African American (AA) and 1% of Hispanic/Latinx (HL) individuals and increases risk for heart failure. Delayed and missed diagnoses could potentiate health disparities in these populations. We evaluated whether population-based genomic screening could effectively identify individuals at risk for hATTR and prompt initiation of risk management. We identified participants of the BioMe Biobank in New York City who received TTR V142I results through a pilot genomic screening program. We performed a retrospective medical record review to evaluate for the presence hATTR-related systemic features, uptake of recommended follow-up, and short-term outcomes. Thirty-two AA (N = 17) and HL (N = 15) individuals received a TTR V142I result (median age 57, 81% female). None had a previous diagnosis of hATTR. Eighteen (56%) had hATTR-related systemic features, including 4 (13%) with heart failure, 10 (31%) with carpal tunnel syndrome, and 10 (31%) with spinal stenosis. Eighteen (56%) pursued follow-up with a cardiologist within 8 months. One person received a diagnosis of hATTR. Thus, we found that the majority of V142I-positive individuals had hATTR-related systemic features at the time of result disclosure, including well-described red flags. Genomic screening can help identify hATTR risk and guide management early on, avoiding potential delays in diagnosis and treatment.