Toward clinical genomics in everyday medicine: perspectives and recommendations.

Precision or personalized medicine through clinical genome and exome sequencing has been described by some as a revolution that could transform healthcare delivery, yet it is currently used in only a small fraction of patients, principally for the diagnosis of suspected Mendelian conditions and for targeting cancer treatments. Given the burden of illness in our society, it is of interest to ask how clinical genome and exome sequencing can be constructively integrated more broadly into the routine practice of medicine for the betterment of public health. In November 2014, 46 experts from academia, industry, policy and patient advocacy gathered in a conference sponsored by Illumina, Inc. to discuss this question, share viewpoints and propose recommendations. This perspective summarizes that work and identifies some of the obstacles and opportunities that must be considered in translating advances in genomics more widely into the practice of medicine.

Naming and counting disorders (conditions) included in newborn screening panels.

The rapid introduction of new technologies for newborn screening is affecting decisions about the disorders (conditions) that are required or offered as an option through public and private newborn screening. An American College of Medical Genetics report to the Health Resources and Services Administration summarized an extensive effort by a group of experts, with diverse expertise within the newborn screening system, to determine a process for selecting a uniform panel of newborn screening disorders. The expert panel did not propose a mechanism for counting or naming conditions. Differences in the nomenclature used to identify disorders have resulted in difficulties in developing a consensus listing and counting scheme for the disorders in the recommended uniform panel. We suggest a system of nomenclature that correlates the screening panel of disorders recommended in the American College of Medical Genetics report with the screening analyte and accepted standardized nomenclature. This nomenclature system is proposed to remove ambiguity and to increase national uniformity in naming and counting screening disorders.

Technical standards and guidelines: venous thromboembolism (Factor V Leiden and prothrombin 20210G >A testing): a disease-specific supplement to the standards and guidelines for clinical genetics laboratories.

These standards and guidelines are designed primarily as an educational resource for clinical laboratory geneticists to help them provide quality clinical laboratory genetic services. Adherence to this statement does not necessarily ensure a successful medical outcome. These standards and guidelines should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinical molecular geneticist should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific clinical circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. It may be prudent, however, to document in the laboratory record the rationale for any significant deviation from these standards and guidelines.

Standards and guidelines for CFTR mutation testing.

One mission of the ACMG Laboratory Quality Assurance (QA) Committee is to develop standards and guidelines for clinical genetics laboratories, including cytogenetics, biochemical, and molecular genetics specialties. This document was developed under the auspices of the Molecular Subcommittee of the Laboratory QA Committee by the Cystic Fibrosis (CF) Working Group. It was placed on the "fast track" to address the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical quality assurance practices of laboratories currently providing testing for CF. Due to the anticipated impact of the ACMG recommendation statement endorsing carrier testing of reproductive couples, it was viewed that CF testing would increase in volume and that the number of laboratories offering CF testing would also likely increase. Therefore, this document was drafted with the premise of providing useful information gained by experienced laboratory directors who have provided such testing for many years. In many instances, "tips" are given. However, these guidelines are not to be interpreted as restrictive or the only approach but to provide a helpful guide. Certainly, appropriately trained and credentialed laboratory directors have flexibility to utilize various testing platforms and design testing strategies with considerable latitude. We felt that it was essential to include technique-specific guidelines of several current technologies commonly used in laboratories providing CF testing, since three of the four technologies discussed are available commercially and are widely utilized. We take the view that these technologies will change, and thus this document will change with future review.

GeneTests-GeneClinics: genetic testing information for a growing audience.

The development and usage of two companion NIH-funded genetic testing information databases, GeneTests (www.genetests.org) and GeneClinics (www.geneclinics.org), now merged into one web site, reflect the steadily increasing use of genetic testing and the expanding audience for genetic testing information. Established in 1993 as Helix, a genetics laboratory directory of approximately 110 listings, GeneTests has grown into a database of over 900 tests for inherited diseases, a directory of over 500 international laboratories, a directory of over 1,000 U.S. and international genetics clinics, and a resource for educational/teaching materials and reports of summary genetic test data. GeneClinics, founded in 1997 as an expert-authored, peer-reviewed, disease-specific knowledge base relating genetic testing to patient care, has grown steadily, now containing over 130 expert-authored, peer-reviewed full-text entries relating genetic testing information to diagnosis, management, and genetic counseling of specific inherited diseases. In spring 2001 the two databases were merged and in October 2001 the two web sites were merged for the purpose of seamless navigation into the GeneTests-GeneClinics site (www.genetests.org or www.geneclinics.org); the GeneClinics knowledge base was renamed "GeneReviews" to avoid confusion with the U.S. and international clinic directories. As genetic testing has moved steadily out of research venues and into routine medical practice, the user audience for these databases has become international and expansive and includes healthcare providers, patients, educators, policy makers, and the media. The use of these combined resources has grown to approximately 3,200 visits/day.