Gender differences in appointments to pathology department interim chair positions and subsequent advancement to permanent chair positions.

Females are under-represented as departmental chairs in academic medical centers and identifying ways to increase their numbers in this position would be useful. A previous study of women chairs of pathology showed that 35% of permanent chairs had previously been interim chairs, suggesting that the interim position was a common pathway for women to advance to a permanent chair position. We sought to determine whether it might also be true for males and if not, possible reasons for the difference. Between January 2016 and June 2022, the Association of Pathology Chairs identified 50 people who had served as interim pathology department chairs. Males served as interim chairs more often than females (66% vs 34%), but, within this time frame, female interim chairs were more likely to become permanent chairs than males (47% of females compared to 27% of males). To better understand the difference in the rate of advancement from interim to permanent chair, we surveyed the 50 individuals who had served as interim chairs to explore gender differences in backgrounds, reasons for serving as interim chairs and reasons for seeking or not seeking the permanent chair position. No significant gender differences were found except that male interim chairs were older (59.2 years) than female interim chairs (50.4 years). This study affirms that serving as an interim chair is a common pathway for females to become permanent chairs, while it is less so for males, although the reasons for this difference could not be determined.

Real-World Results from Combined Screening for Monogenic Genomic Health Risks and Reproductive Risks in 300 Adults.

New methods and demonstrations of feasibility guide future implementation of genomic population health screening programs. This is the first report of genomic population screening in a primary care, non-research setting using existing large carrier and health risk gene sequencing panels combined into one 432-gene test that is offered to adults of any health status. This report summarizes basic demographic data and analyses patterns of pathogenic and likely pathogenic genetic findings for the first 300 individuals tested in this real-world scenario. We devised a classification system for gene results to facilitate clear message development for our Genomic Medicine Action Plan messaging tool used to summarize and activate results for patients and primary care providers. Potential genetic health risks of various magnitudes for a broad range of disorders were identified in 16% to 34% of tested individuals. The frequency depends on criteria used for the type and penetrance of risk. 86% of individuals are carriers for one or more recessive diseases. Detecting, reporting, and guiding response to diverse genetic health risks and recessive carrier states in a single primary care genomic screening test appears feasible and effective. This is an important step toward exploring an exome or genome sequence as a multi-purpose clinical screening tool.

Primary Care Implementation of Genomic Population Health Screening Using a Large Gene Sequencing Panel.

To realize the promise of genomic medicine, harness the power of genomic technologies, and capitalize on the extraordinary pace of research linking genomic variation to disease risks, healthcare systems must embrace and integrate genomics into routine healthcare. We have implemented an innovative pilot program for genomic population health screening for any-health-status adults within the largest health system in Vermont, United States. This program draws on key research and technological advances to safely extract clinical value for genomics in routine health care. The program offers no-cost, non-research DNA sequencing to patients by their primary care providers as a preventive health tool. We partnered with a commercial clinical testing company for two next generation sequencing gene panels comprising 431 genes related to both high and low-penetrance common health risks and carrier status for recessive disorders. Only pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants are reported. Routine written clinical consultation is provided with a concise, clinical "action plan" that presents core messages for primary care provider and patient use and supports clinical management and health education beyond the testing laboratory's reports. Access to genetic counseling is free in most cases. Predefined care pathways and access to genetics experts facilitates the appropriate use of results. This pilot tests the feasibility of routine, ethical, and scalable use of population genomic screening in healthcare despite generally imperfect genomic competency among both the public and health care providers. This article describes the program design, implementation process, guiding philosophies, and insights from 2 years of experience offering testing and returning results in primary care settings. To aid others planning similar programs, we review our barriers, solutions, and perceived gaps in the context of an implementation research framework.

Generating Discretionary Income in an Academic Department of Pathology.

The 2021 Association of Pathology Chairs Annual Meeting included a chairs' session and a premeeting discussion-group webinar sponsored by the Senior Fellows Group (former chairs of academic departments of pathology who have remained active in the Association of Pathology Chairs) focused on generating discretionary income for departments. Discretionary income was defined as revenue that can be used by the department with few, if any, restrictions. Such income is particularly desirable given limitations on departmental budgets. Four discussion-group panelists presented the funds-flow model in their respective institutions and how they derived and used discretionary income. Discretionary income was obtained from both external sources (eg, philanthropy, indirect cost recovery, partnerships with outside entities, medical education courses, research laboratory agreements, clinical trials) and internal sources (eg, core facilities, institutional programmatic support, institutional incentive programs). Significant departmental variations were associated with differences in institutional financial structure and policies, revenue-generating capabilities of the department and individual faculty, practice plan policies, donor intentions, and geographic market forces. Most finances were dependent upon a robust funds-flow model. Uses of discretionary funds included salary support, recruitment expenses (including start-up packages), research equipment, space renovation, social events, support of academic programs, and travel. Panelists also discussed particular challenges of discretionary-fund generation and use during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Notably, each institution had its own unique methodology for generating discretionary income, and no obvious standard approach was identified. The 2 moderators emphasized the importance of identifying and understanding opportunities, issues, and institutional culture surrounding generation and use of discretionary funds.

The New York State SARS-CoV-2 Testing Consortium: Regional Communication in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, created an unprecedented need for comprehensive laboratory testing of populations, in order to meet the needs of medical practice and to guide the management and functioning of our society. With the greater New York metropolitan area as an epicenter of this pandemic beginning in March 2020, a consortium of laboratory leaders from the assembled New York academic medical institutions was formed to help identify and solve the challenges of deploying testing. This report brings forward the experience of this consortium, based on the real-world challenges which we encountered in testing patients and in supporting the recovery effort to reestablish the health care workplace. In coordination with the Greater New York Hospital Association and with the public health laboratory of New York State, this consortium communicated with state leadership to help inform public decision-making addressing the crisis. Through the length of the pandemic, the consortium has been a critical mechanism for sharing experience and best practices in dealing with issues including the following: instrument platforms, sample sources, test performance, pre- and post-analytical issues, supply chain, institutional testing capacity, pooled testing, biospecimen science, and research. The consortium also has been a mechanism for staying abreast of state and municipal policies and initiatives, and their impact on institutional and laboratory operations. The experience of this consortium may be of value to current and future laboratory professionals and policy-makers alike, in dealing with major events that impact regional laboratory services.

Women in Academic Pathology: Pathways to Department Chair.

The Association of Pathology Chairs, an organization of American and Canadian academic pathology departments, has a record percent of women department chairs in its ranks (31%), although still not representative of the percent of women pathology faculty (43%). These women chairs were surveyed to determine what had impeded and what had facilitated their academic advancement before becoming chairs. The 2 most frequently identified impediments to their career advancement were heavy clinical loads and the lack of time, training, and/or funding to pursue research. Related to the second impediment, only one respondent became chair of a department which was in a top 25 National Institutes of Health-sponsored research medical school. Eighty-nine percent of respondents said that they had experienced gender bias during their careers in pathology, and 31% identified gender bias as an important impediment to advancement. The top facilitator of career advancement before becoming chairs was a supportive family. Strikingly, 98% of respondents have a spouse or partner, 75% have children, and 38% had children younger than 18 when becoming chairs. Additional top facilitators were opportunities to attend national meetings and opportunities to participate in leadership. Previous leadership experiences included directing a clinical service, a residency training program, and/or a medical student education program. These results suggest important ways to increase the success of women in academic pathology and increasing the percent of women department chairs, including supporting a family life and providing time, encouragement and resources for research, attending national meetings, and taking on departmental leadership positions.

Direct RT-qPCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from patient nasopharyngeal swabs without an RNA extraction step.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented need for rapid diagnostic testing. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a standard assay that includes an RNA extraction step from a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab followed by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to detect the purified SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The current global shortage of RNA extraction kits has caused a severe bottleneck to COVID-19 testing. The goal of this study was to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected from NP samples via a direct RT-qPCR assay that omits the RNA extraction step altogether. The direct RT-qPCR approach correctly identified 92% of a reference set of blinded NP samples (n = 155) demonstrated to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by traditional clinical diagnostic RT-qPCR that included an RNA extraction. Importantly, the direct method had sufficient sensitivity to reliably detect those patients with viral loads that correlate with the presence of infectious virus. Thus, this strategy has the potential to ease supply choke points to substantially expand COVID-19 testing and screening capacity and should be applicable throughout the world.

DIRECT RT-qPCR DETECTION OF SARS-CoV-2 RNA FROM PATIENT NASOPHARYNGEAL SWABS WITHOUT AN RNA EXTRACTION STEP.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unprecedented need for rapid diagnostic testing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) recommend a standard assay that includes an RNA extraction step from a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab followed by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to detect the purified SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The current global shortage of RNA extraction kits has caused a severe bottleneck to COVID-19 testing. We hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 RNA could be detected from NP samples via a direct RT-qPCR assay that omits the RNA extraction step altogether, and tested this hypothesis on a series of blinded clinical samples. The direct RT-qPCR approach correctly identified 92% of NP samples (n = 155) demonstrated to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by traditional clinical diagnostic RT-qPCR that included an RNA extraction. Thus, direct RT-qPCR could be a front-line approach to identify the substantial majority of COVID-19 patients, reserving a repeat test with RNA extraction for those individuals with high suspicion of infection but an initial negative result. This strategy would drastically ease supply chokepoints of COVID-19 testing and should be applicable throughout the world.

Predispositional genome sequencing in healthy adults: design, participant characteristics, and early outcomes of the PeopleSeq Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of healthy individuals are undergoing predispositional personal genome sequencing. Here we describe the design and early outcomes of the PeopleSeq Consortium, a multi-cohort collaboration of predispositional genome sequencing projects, which is examining the medical, behavioral, and economic outcomes of returning genomic sequencing information to healthy individuals. METHODS: Apparently healthy adults who participated in four of the sequencing projects in the Consortium were included. Web-based surveys were administered before and after genomic results disclosure, or in some cases only after results disclosure. Surveys inquired about sociodemographic characteristics, motivations and concerns, behavioral and medical responses to sequencing results, and perceived utility. RESULTS: Among 1395 eligible individuals, 658 enrolled in the Consortium when contacted and 543 have completed a survey after receiving their genomic results thus far (mean age 53.0 years, 61.4% male, 91.7% white, 95.5% college graduates). Most participants (98.1%) were motivated to undergo sequencing because of curiosity about their genetic make-up. The most commonly reported concerns prior to pursuing sequencing included how well the results would predict future risk (59.2%) and the complexity of genetic variant interpretation (56.8%), while 47.8% of participants were concerned about the privacy of their genetic information. Half of participants reported discussing their genomic results with a healthcare provider during a median of 8.0 months after receiving the results; 13.5% reported making an additional appointment with a healthcare provider specifically because of their results. Few participants (< 10%) reported making changes to their diet, exercise habits, or insurance coverage because of their results. Many participants (39.5%) reported learning something new to improve their health that they did not know before. Reporting regret or harm from the decision to undergo sequencing was rare (< 3.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Healthy individuals who underwent predispositional sequencing expressed some concern around privacy prior to pursuing sequencing, but were enthusiastic about their experience and not distressed by their results. While reporting value in their health-related results, few participants reported making medical or lifestyle changes.

Use of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests to Guide Cancer Treatment: Results From a Nationally Representative Survey of Oncologists in the United States.

Purpose: There are no nationally representative data on oncologists' use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing in practice. The purpose of this study was to investigate how oncologists in the United States use NGS tests to evaluate patients with cancer and to inform treatment recommendations. Methods: The study used data from the National Survey of Precision Medicine in Cancer Treatment, which was mailed to a nationally representative sample of oncologists in 2017 (N = 1,281; cooperation rate = 38%). Weighted percentages were calculated to describe NGS test use. Multivariable modeling was conducted to assess the association of test use with oncologist practice characteristics. Results: Overall, 75.6% of oncologists reported using NGS tests to guide treatment decisions. Of these oncologists, 34.0% used them often to guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced refractory disease, 29.1% to determine eligibility for clinical trials, and 17.5% to decide on off-label use of Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs. NGS test results informed treatment recommendations often for 26.8%, sometimes for 52.4%, and never or rarely for 20.8% of oncologists. Oncologists younger than 50 years of age, holding a faculty appointment, having genomics training, seeing more than 50 unique patients per month, and having access to a molecular tumor board were more likely to use NGS tests. Conclusion: In 2017, most oncologists in the United States were using NGS tests to guide treatment decisions for their patients. More research is needed to establish the clinical usefulness of these tests, to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines for their use in practice, and to ensure that patients who can benefit from these new technologies receive appropriate testing and treatment.

Implementation science, genomic precision medicine, and improved health: A new path forward?

Implementation of genomic discoveries into health care optimally includes evaluation of outcomes for recipients of care, providers, payers, and health care systems. However, the influence of specific aspects of the implementation process on observed outcomes may be missed if assessment of implementation success is not built into the implementation design. The intersection of implementation science with genomics may provide new insights on how to maximize the benefits of emerging genomic technologies in health care. In this summary, members of the Roundtable on Genomics and Precision Health, formerly the Roundtable on Translating Genomic-Based Research for Health, of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the American Academy of Nursing explore challenges and opportunities for nurses to participate in implementing genomic discoveries into their practice informed by the principles of implementation science. Implementation requires collaboration across disciplines. Nurses can take leadership roles in engaging key stakeholders in health care organizations, assuring that communications regarding implementation are consistent with genomic literacy for each group of stakeholders, and planning for evaluation of data to assess how each component of the implementation process affected the overall outcome for health care.

Standards for Clinical Grade Genomic Databases.

CONTEXT: Next-generation sequencing performed in a clinical environment must meet clinical standards, which requires reproducibility of all aspects of the testing. Clinical-grade genomic databases (CGGDs) are required to classify a variant and to assist in the professional interpretation of clinical next-generation sequencing. Applying quality laboratory standards to the reference databases used for sequence-variant interpretation presents a new challenge for validation and curation. OBJECTIVES: To define CGGD and the categories of information contained in CGGDs and to frame recommendations for the structure and use of these databases in clinical patient care. DESIGN: Members of the College of American Pathologists Personalized Health Care Committee reviewed the literature and existing state of genomic databases and developed a framework for guiding CGGD development in the future. RESULTS: Clinical-grade genomic databases may provide different types of information. This work group defined 3 layers of information in CGGDs: clinical genomic variant repositories, genomic medical data repositories, and genomic medicine evidence databases. The layers are differentiated by the types of genomic and medical information contained and the utility in assisting with clinical interpretation of genomic variants. Clinical-grade genomic databases must meet specific standards regarding submission, curation, and retrieval of data, as well as the maintenance of privacy and security. CONCLUSION: These organizing principles for CGGDs should serve as a foundation for future development of specific standards that support the use of such databases for patient care.

The Pathologist Workforce in the United States: II. An Interactive Modeling Tool for Analyzing Future Qualitative and Quantitative Staffing Demands for Services.

CONTEXT: Pathologists are physicians who make diagnoses based on interpretation of tissue and cellular specimens (surgical/cytopathology, molecular/genomic pathology, autopsy), provide medical leadership and consultation for laboratory medicine, and are integral members of their institutions' interdisciplinary patient care teams. OBJECTIVE: To develop a dynamic modeling tool to examine how individual factors and practice variables can forecast demand for pathologist services. DESIGN: Build and test a computer-based software model populated with data from surveys and best estimates about current and new pathologist efforts. RESULTS: Most pathologists' efforts focus on anatomic (52%), laboratory (14%), and other direct services (8%) for individual patients. Population-focused services (12%) (eg, laboratory medical direction) and other professional responsibilities (14%) (eg, teaching, research, and hospital committees) consume the rest of their time. Modeling scenarios were used to assess the need to increase or decrease efforts related globally to the Affordable Care Act, and specifically, to genomic medicine, laboratory consolidation, laboratory medical direction, and new areas where pathologists' expertise can add value. CONCLUSIONS: Our modeling tool allows pathologists, educators, and policy experts to assess how various factors may affect demand for pathologists' services. These factors include an aging population, advances in biomedical technology, and changing roles in capitated, value-based, and team-based medical care systems. In the future, pathologists will likely have to assume new roles, develop new expertise, and become more efficient in practicing medicine to accommodate new value-based delivery models.

College of American Pathologists' laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests.

CONTEXT: The higher throughput and lower per-base cost of next-generation sequencing (NGS) as compared to Sanger sequencing has led to its rapid adoption in clinical testing. The number of laboratories offering NGS-based tests has also grown considerably in the past few years, despite the fact that specific Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988/College of American Pathologists (CAP) laboratory standards had not yet been developed to regulate this technology. OBJECTIVE: To develop a checklist for clinical testing using NGS technology that sets standards for the analytic wet bench process and for bioinformatics or "dry bench" analyses. As NGS-based clinical tests are new to diagnostic testing and are of much greater complexity than traditional Sanger sequencing-based tests, there is an urgent need to develop new regulatory standards for laboratories offering these tests. DESIGN: To develop the necessary regulatory framework for NGS and to facilitate appropriate adoption of this technology for clinical testing, CAP formed a committee in 2011, the NGS Work Group, to deliberate upon the contents to be included in the checklist. Results . -A total of 18 laboratory accreditation checklist requirements for the analytic wet bench process and bioinformatics analysis processes have been included within CAP's molecular pathology checklist (MOL). CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the important issues considered by the CAP committee during the development of the new checklist requirements, which address documentation, validation, quality assurance, confirmatory testing, exception logs, monitoring of upgrades, variant interpretation and reporting, incidental findings, data storage, version traceability, and data transfer confidentiality.

The Cancer Genomics Resource List 2014.

CONTEXT: Genomic sequencing for cancer is offered by commercial for-profit laboratories, independent laboratory networks, and laboratories in academic medical centers and integrated health networks. The variability among the tests has created a complex, confusing environment. OBJECTIVE: To address the complexity, the Personalized Health Care (PHC) Committee of the College of American Pathologists proposed the development of a cancer genomics resource list (CGRL). The goal of this resource was to assist the laboratory pathology and clinical oncology communities. DESIGN: The PHC Committee established a working group in 2012 to address this goal. The group consisted of site-specific experts in cancer genetic sequencing. The group identified current next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based cancer tests and compiled them into a usable resource. The genes were annotated by the working group. The annotation process drew on published knowledge, including public databases and the medical literature. RESULTS: The compiled list includes NGS panels offered by 19 laboratories or vendors, accompanied by annotations. The list has 611 different genes for which NGS-based mutation testing is offered. Surprisingly, of these 611 genes, 0 genes were listed in every panel, 43 genes were listed in 4 panels, and 54 genes were listed in 3 panels. In addition, tests for 393 genes were offered by only 1 or 2 institutions. Table 1 provides an example of gene mutations offered for breast cancer genomic testing with the annotation as it appears in the CGRL 2014. CONCLUSIONS: The final product, referred to as the Cancer Genomics Resource List 2014, is available as supplemental digital content.

Breaking a vicious cycle.

Despite prodigious advances in tumor biology research, few tumor-biomarker tests have been adopted as standard clinical practice. This lack of reliable tests stems from a vicious cycle of undervaluation, resulting from inconsistent regulatory standards and reimbursement, as well as insufficient investment in research and development, scrutiny of biomarker publications by journals, and evidence of analytical validity and clinical utility. We offer recommendations designed to serve as a roadmap to break this vicious cycle and call for a national dialogue, as changes in regulation, reimbursement, investment, peer review, and guidelines development require the participation of all stakeholders.