ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a scalable national program to build confidence, competence and capability in the use of rapid genomic testing in the acute pediatric setting. METHODS: We used theory-informed approaches to design a modular, adaptive program of blended learning aimed at diverse professional groups involved in acute pediatric care. The program comprised four online learning modules and an online workshop and was centered on case-based learning. We evaluated the program using the Kirkpatrick four-level model of training evaluation and report our findings using the RISE2 guidelines for genomics education and evaluation. RESULTS: Two hundred and two participants engaged with at least one component of the program. Participants self-reported increased confidence in using rGT, (p<0.001) and quiz responses objectively demonstrated increased competence (e.g., correct responses to a question on pre-test counseling increased from 30% to 64%; p<0.001). Additionally, their capability in applying genomic principles to simulated clinical cases increased (p<0.001), as did their desire to take on more responsibility for performing rGT. The clinical interpretation of more complex test results (such as negative results or variants of uncertain significance) appeared to be more challenging, indicating a need for targeted education in this area. CONCLUSION: The program format was effective in delivering multidisciplinary and wide-scale genomics education in the acute care context. The modular approach we have developed now lends itself to application in other medical specialties or areas of healthcare.
ABSTRACT
The KidGen Collaborative's Policy Implementation Workshop 2023 celebrated the 10th anniversary of Australia's first kidney genetics clinic in Brisbane. This event marked the establishment of a national network now comprising 19 kidney genetics clinics across Australia, all dedicated to providing equitable access to genomic testing for families affected by genetic kidney diseases. The workshop reflected on past progress and outlined future objectives for kidney genetics in Australia, recognising the collaborative efforts of clinical teams, researchers, and patients. Key insights from the workshop are documented in the proceedings.
Subject(s)
Kidney Diseases , Humans , Australia , Kidney Diseases/genetics , Genetic Testing/trendsABSTRACT
Newborn screening (NBS) programmes are highly successful, trusted, public health interventions. Genomic sequencing offers the opportunity to increase the benefits of NBS by screening infants for a greater number and variety of childhood-onset conditions. This study aimed to describe who needs to do what, when, and for whom to deliver genomic newborn screening (gNBS) and capture perceived implementation barriers and enablers. 'Key informants' (individuals involved in the delivery of NBS) were interviewed. The Actor, Action, Context, Time and Target framework guided data collection and analysis. Participants (N = 20) identified new Actions required to deliver gNBS (educating healthcare providers, longitudinal psychosocial support), NBS Actions needing modification (obtaining consent) and NBS Actions that could be adopted for gNBS (prompt referral pathways). Obtaining consent in a prenatal Context was a source of some disagreement. The Time to disclose high chance results was raised as a key consideration in gNBS programme design. Genetic counsellors were identified as key Actors in results management, but workforce limitations may be a barrier. Online decision support tools were an enabler to offering gNBS. The implementation of gNBS will require behaviour changes from HCPs delivering NBS. Findings can inform how to deliver gNBS at population-scale.
ABSTRACT
Health care is at a turning point. We are shifting from protocolized medicine to precision medicine, and digital health systems are facilitating this shift. By providing clinicians with detailed information for each patient and analytic support for decision-making at the point of care, digital health technologies are enabling a new era of precision medicine. Genomic data also provide clinicians with information that can improve the accuracy and timeliness of diagnosis, optimize prescribing, and target risk reduction strategies, all of which are key elements for precision medicine. However, genomic data are predominantly seen as diagnostic information and are not routinely integrated into the clinical workflows of electronic medical records. The use of genomic data holds significant potential for precision medicine; however, as genomic data are fundamentally different from the information collected during routine practice, special considerations are needed to use this information in a digital health setting. This paper outlines the potential of genomic data integration with electronic records, and how these data can enable precision medicine.
Subject(s)
Genetic Testing , Renal Insufficiency , Humans , Australia , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Renal Insufficiency/genetics , Renal Insufficiency/diagnosis , Aged , AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Implementing genomic sequencing into newborn screening programs allows for significant expansion in the number and scope of conditions detected. We sought to explore public preferences and perspectives on which conditions to include in genomic newborn screening (gNBS). METHODS: We recruited English-speaking members of the Australian public over 18 years of age, using social media, and invited them to participate in online focus groups. RESULTS: Seventy-five members of the public aged 23-72 participated in one of fifteen focus groups. Participants agreed that if prioritisation of conditions was necessary, childhood-onset conditions were more important to include than later-onset conditions. Despite the purpose of the focus groups being to elicit public preferences, participants wanted to defer to others, such as health professionals or those with a lived experience of each condition, to make decisions about which conditions to include. Many participants saw benefit in including conditions with no available treatment. Participants agreed that gNBS should be fully publicly funded. CONCLUSION: How many and which conditions are included in a gNBS program will be a complex decision requiring detailed assessment of benefits and costs alongside public and professional engagement. Our study provides support for implementing gNBS for treatable childhood-onset conditions.
Subject(s)
Neonatal Screening , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Australia , Adult , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Genomics , Focus Groups , Public Opinion , Genetic Testing , Young AdultABSTRACT
Reanalyzing stored genomic data over time is highly effective in increasing diagnostic yield in rare disease. Automation holds the promise of delivering the benefits of reanalysis at scale. Our study aimed to understand current reanalysis practices among Australian clinical and laboratory genetics services and explore attitudes towards large-scale automated re-analysis. We collected audit data regarding testing and reanalysis volumes, policies and procedures from all Australian diagnostic laboratories providing rare disease genomic testing. A genetic health professionals' survey explored current practices, barriers to reanalysis, preferences and attitudes towards automation. Between 2018 and 2021, Australian diagnostic laboratories performed over 25,000 new genomic tests and 950 reanalyses, predominantly in response to clinician requests. Laboratory and clinical genetic health professionals (N = 134) identified workforce capacity as the principal barrier to reanalysis. No specific laboratory or clinical guidelines for genomic data reanalysis or policies were identified nationally. Perceptions of acceptability and feasibility of automating reanalysis were positive, with professionals emphasizing clinical and workflow benefits. In conclusion, there is a large and rapidly growing unmet need for reanalysis of existing genomic data. Beyond developing scalable automated reanalysis pipelines, leadership and policy are needed to successfully transform service delivery models and maximize clinical benefit.
ABSTRACT
Copy number variants (CNVs) are significant contributors to the pathogenicity of rare genetic diseases and, with new innovative methods, can now reliably be identified from exome sequencing. Challenges still remain in accurate classification of CNV pathogenicity. CNV calling using GATK-gCNV was performed on exomes from a cohort of 6,633 families (15,759 individuals) with heterogeneous phenotypes and variable prior genetic testing collected at the Broad Institute Center for Mendelian Genomics of the Genomics Research to Elucidate the Genetics of Rare Diseases consortium and analyzed using the seqr platform. The addition of CNV detection to exome analysis identified causal CNVs for 171 families (2.6%). The estimated sizes of CNVs ranged from 293 bp to 80 Mb. The causal CNVs consisted of 140 deletions, 15 duplications, 3 suspected complex structural variants (SVs), 3 insertions, and 10 complex SVs, the latter two groups being identified by orthogonal confirmation methods. To classify CNV variant pathogenicity, we used the 2020 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/ClinGen CNV interpretation standards and developed additional criteria to evaluate allelic and functional data as well as variants on the X chromosome to further advance the framework. We interpreted 151 CNVs as likely pathogenic/pathogenic and 20 CNVs as high-interest variants of uncertain significance. Calling CNVs from existing exome data increases the diagnostic yield for individuals undiagnosed after standard testing approaches, providing a higher-resolution alternative to arrays at a fraction of the cost of genome sequencing. Our improvements to the classification approach advances the systematic framework to assess the pathogenicity of CNVs.
Subject(s)
DNA Copy Number Variations , Exome Sequencing , Exome , Rare Diseases , Humans , DNA Copy Number Variations/genetics , Rare Diseases/genetics , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Exome/genetics , Male , Female , Cohort Studies , Genetic Testing/methodsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a highly successful public health programme that uses biochemical and other assays to screen for severe but treatable childhood-onset conditions. Introducing genomic sequencing into NBS programmes increases the range of detectable conditions but raises practical and ethical issues. Evidence from prospectively ascertained cohorts is required to guide policy and future implementation. This study aims to develop, implement and evaluate a genomic NBS (gNBS) pilot programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The BabyScreen+ study will pilot gNBS in three phases. In the preimplementation phase, study materials, including education resources, decision support and data collection tools, will be designed. Focus groups and key informant interviews will also be undertaken to inform delivery of the study and future gNBS programmes. During the implementation phase, we will prospectively recruit birth parents in Victoria, Australia, to screen 1000 newborns for over 600 severe, treatable, childhood-onset conditions. Clinically accredited whole genome sequencing will be performed following standard NBS using the same sample. High chance results will be returned by genetic healthcare professionals, with follow-on genetic and other confirmatory testing and referral to specialist services as required. The postimplementation phase will evaluate the feasibility of gNBS as the primary aim, and assess ethical, implementation, psychosocial and health economic factors to inform future service delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project received ethics approval from the Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne Research Ethics Committee: HREC/91500/RCHM-2023, HREC/90929/RCHM-2022 and HREC/91392/RCHM-2022. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, and through peer-reviewed journals and conferences.
Subject(s)
Genomics , Neonatal Screening , Child , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , VictoriaABSTRACT
Genome-wide sequencing and genetic matchmaker services are propelling a new era of genotype-driven ascertainment of novel genetic conditions. The degree to which reported phenotype data in discovery-focused studies address informational priorities for clinicians and families is unclear. We identified reports published from 2017 to 2021 in 10 genetics journals of novel Mendelian disorders. We adjudicated the quality and detail of the phenotype data via 46 questions pertaining to six priority domains: (I) Development, cognition, and mental health; (II) Feeding and growth; (III) Medication use and treatment history; (IV) Pain, sleep, and quality of life; (V) Adulthood; and (VI) Epilepsy. For a subset of articles, all subsequent published follow-up case descriptions were identified and assessed in a similar manner. A modified Delphi approach was used to develop consensus reporting guidelines, with input from content experts across four countries. In total, 200 of 3243 screened publications met inclusion criteria. Relevant phenotypic details across each of the 6 domains were rated superficial or deficient in >87% of papers. For example, less than 10% of publications provided details regarding neuropsychiatric diagnoses and "behavioural issues", or about the type/nature of feeding problems. Follow-up reports (n = 95) rarely contributed this additional phenotype data. In summary, phenotype information relevant to clinical management, genetic counselling, and the stated priorities of patients and families is lacking for many newly described genetic diseases. The PHELIX (PHEnotype LIsting fiX) reporting guideline checklists were developed to improve phenotype reporting in the genomic era.
Subject(s)
Genetic Testing , Genomics , Humans , Base Sequence , High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingABSTRACT
Despite the significant advances in understanding the genetic architecture of epilepsy, many patients do not receive a molecular diagnosis after genomic testing. Re-analysing existing genomic data has emerged as a potent method to increase diagnostic yields-providing the benefits of genomic-enabled medicine to more individuals afflicted with a range of different conditions. The primary drivers for these new diagnoses are the discovery of novel gene-disease and variants-disease relationships; however, most decisions to trigger re-analysis are based on the passage of time rather than the accumulation of new knowledge. To explore how our understanding of a specific condition changes and how this impacts re-analysis of genomic data from epilepsy patients, we developed Vigelint. This approach combines the information from PanelApp and ClinVar to characterise how the clinically relevant genes and causative variants available to laboratories change over time, and this approach to five clinical-grade epilepsy panels. Applying the Vigelint pipeline to these panels revealed highly variable patterns in new, clinically relevant knowledge becoming publicly available. This variability indicates that a more dynamic approach to re-analysis may benefit the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy patients. Moreover, this work suggests that Vigelint can provide empirical data to guide more nuanced, condition-specific approaches to re-analysis.
Subject(s)
Epilepsy , Humans , Epilepsy/diagnosis , Epilepsy/genetics , Genomics , Genetic TestingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Determining the value of genomic tests in rare disease necessitates a broader conceptualization of genomic utility beyond diagnostic yield. Despite widespread discussion, consensus toward which aspects of value to consider is lacking. This study aimed to use expert opinion to identify and refine priority indicators of utility in rare disease genomic testing. METHODS: We used 2 survey rounds following Delphi methodology to obtain consensus on indicators of utility among experts involved in policy, clinical, research, and consumer advocacy leadership in Australia. We analyzed quantitative and qualitative data to identify, define, and determine priority indicators. RESULTS: Twenty-five experts completed round 1 and 18 completed both rounds. Twenty indicators reached consensus as a priority in value assessment, including those relating to prognostic information, timeliness of results, practical and health care outcomes, clinical accreditation, and diagnostic yield. Whereas indicators pertaining to discovery research, disutility, and factors secondary to primary reason for testing were considered less of a priority and were removed. CONCLUSION: This study obtained expert consensus on different utility indicators that are considered a priority in determining the value of genomic testing in rare disease in Australia. Indicators may inform a standardized approach to evidence generation and assessment to guide future research, decision making, and implementation efforts.
Subject(s)
Delphi Technique , Genetic Testing , Genomics , Rare Diseases , Humans , Rare Diseases/genetics , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Genetic Testing/standards , Genetic Testing/methods , Genomics/methods , Genomics/standards , Australia , Consensus , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Health economic evidence is needed to inform the design of high-value and cost-effective processes for returning genomic results from analyses for additional findings (AF). This study reports the results of a discrete-choice experiment designed to elicit preferences for the process of returning AF results from the perspective of parents of children with rare conditions and to estimate the value placed on AF analysis. Overall, 94 parents recruited within the Australian Genomics and Melbourne Genomics programmes participated in the survey, providing preferences in a total of 1128 choice scenarios. Statistically significant preferences were identified for the opportunity to change the choices made about AF; receiving positive AF in person from a genetic counsellor; timely access to a medical specialist and high-quality online resources; receiving automatic updates through a secure online portal if new information becomes available; and lower costs. For AF uptake rates ranging between 50-95%, the mean per person value from AF analysis was estimated at AU$450-$1700 (US$300-$1140). The findings enable the design of a value-maximising process of analysis for AF in rare-disease genomic sequencing.
ABSTRACT
Automating reanalysis of genomic data for undiagnosed rare disease patients presents a paradigm shift in how clinical genomics is delivered. We aimed to map the current manual and proposed automated approach to reanalysis and identify possible implementation strategies to address clinical and laboratory staff's perceived challenges to automation. Fourteen semi-structured interviews guided by a simplified process map were conducted with clinical and laboratory staff across Australia. Individual process maps were integrated into an overview of the current process, noting variation in service delivery. Participants then mapped an automated approach and were invited to discuss perceived challenges and possible supports to automation. Responses were analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, linking to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change framework to identify theory-informed implementation strategies. Process mapping demonstrates how automation streamlines processes with eleven steps reduced to seven. Although participants welcomed automation, challenges were raised at six of the steps. Strategies to overcome challenges include embedding project champions, developing education materials, facilitating clinical innovation and quality monitoring tools, and altering reimbursement structures. Future work can build on these findings to develop context specific implementation strategies to guide translation of an automated approach to reanalysis to improve clinical care and patient outcomes.
Subject(s)
Genomics , Humans , Genomics/methods , Genomics/standards , Qualitative Research , Genetic Testing/standards , Genetic Testing/methods , Australia , AutomationABSTRACT
The calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase type 2 (CAMK2) family consists of four different isozymes, encoded by four different genes-CAMK2A, CAMK2B, CAMK2G, and CAMK2D-of which the first three have been associated recently with neurodevelopmental disorders. CAMK2D is one of the major CAMK2 proteins expressed in the heart and has been associated with cardiac anomalies. Although this CAMK2 isoform is also known to be one of the major CAMK2 subtypes expressed during early brain development, it has never been linked with neurodevelopmental disorders until now. Here we show that CAMK2D plays an important role in neurodevelopment not only in mice but also in humans. We identified eight individuals harboring heterozygous variants in CAMK2D who display symptoms of intellectual disability, delayed speech, behavioral problems, and dilated cardiomyopathy. The majority of the variants tested lead to a gain of function (GoF), which appears to cause both neurological problems and dilated cardiomyopathy. In contrast, loss-of-function (LoF) variants appear to induce only neurological symptoms. Together, we describe a cohort of individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders and cardiac anomalies, harboring pathogenic variants in CAMK2D, confirming an important role for the CAMK2D isozyme in both heart and brain function.
Subject(s)
Calcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2 , Cardiomyopathy, Dilated , Intellectual Disability , Neurodevelopmental Disorders , Animals , Humans , Mice , Calcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2/genetics , Calcium-Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase Type 2/metabolism , Heart , Neurodevelopmental Disorders/geneticsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Rare disease genomic testing is a complex process involving various resources. Accurate resource estimation is required for informed prioritization and reimbursement decisions. This study aims to analyze the costs and cost drivers of clinical genomic testing. METHODS: Based on genomic sequencing workflows we microcosted limited virtual panel analysis on exome sequencing backbone, proband and trio exome, and genome testing for proband and trio analysis in 2023 Australian Dollars ($). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: Panel testing costs AUD $2373 ($733-$6166), and exome sequencing costs $2823 ($802-$7206) and $5670 ($2006-$11,539) for proband and trio analysis, respectively. Genome sequencing costs $4840 ($2153-$9890) and $11,589 ($5842-$16,562) for proband and trio analysis. The most expensive cost component of genomic testing was sequencing (36.9%-69.4% of total cost), with labor accounting for 27.1%-63.2% of total cost. CONCLUSION: We provide a comprehensive analysis of rare disease genomic testing costs, for a range of clinical testing types and contexts. This information will accurately inform economic evaluations of rare disease genomic testing and decision making on policy settings that assist with implementation, such as genomic testing reimbursement.
Subject(s)
Exome , Rare Diseases , Humans , Exome/genetics , Rare Diseases/diagnosis , Rare Diseases/genetics , Australia , Genomics , FamilyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Genome sequencing (GS)-specific diagnostic rates in prospective tightly ascertained exome sequencing (ES)-negative intellectual disability (ID) cohorts have not been reported extensively. METHODS: ES, GS, epigenetic signatures, and long-read sequencing diagnoses were assessed in 74 trios with at least moderate ID. RESULTS: The ES diagnostic yield was 42 of 74 (57%). GS diagnoses were made in 9 of 32 (28%) ES-unresolved families. Repeated ES with a contemporary pipeline on the GS-diagnosed families identified 8 of 9 single-nucleotide variations/copy-number variations undetected in older ES, confirming a GS-unique diagnostic rate of 1 in 32 (3%). Episignatures contributed diagnostic information in 9% with GS corroboration in 1 of 32 (3%) and diagnostic clues in 2 of 32 (6%). A genetic etiology for ID was detected in 51 of 74 (69%) families. Twelve candidate disease genes were identified. Contemporary ES followed by GS cost US$4976 (95% CI: $3704; $6969) per diagnosis and first-line GS at a cost of $7062 (95% CI: $6210; $8475) per diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Performing GS only in ID trios would be cost equivalent to ES if GS were available at $2435, about a 60% reduction from current prices. This study demonstrates that first-line GS achieves higher diagnostic rate than contemporary ES but at a higher cost.