April 13, 2024

A Framework for Evaluating and Reporting Incidental Findings in Clinical Genomic Testing

  • Shkedi-Rafid S, Dheensa S, Crawford G, Fenwick A, Lucassen A. Defining and managing incidental discoveries in genetics and genomics practice. J Med Genet. 2014;51:715–23.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Ackerman SL, Koenig BA. Understand variations in secondary discovery reporting practices across US genome sequencing laboratories. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018;9:48–57.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Beshir L. A framework for ethically approaching incidental findings in genetic research. EJIFCC. 2020;31:302–9.

    CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Vears D, Amor DJ. A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: when and to whom? Pre-diagnosis. 2022;42:697–704.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Boliche KM, Thompson ML, Kelly MA, Scollon S, Slavotinek AM, Powell BC, et al. Return of incidental genetic findings not recommended by the ACMG for pediatric patients: considerations and opportunities for experiences in genomic sequencing. Genome Med 2022;14:131.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Fernandez CV, Bouffet E, Malkin D, Jabado N, O’Connell C, Avard D, et al. Parental attitudes toward returning results from targeted and incidental genomic research in children. Geneta Med 2014;16:633–40.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Loud JT, Bremer RC, Mai PL, Peters JA, Giri N, Stewart DR, et al. Research participant interest in primary, secondary, and incidental genomic discoveries. Geneta Med 2016;18:1218–25.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Sundby A, Boolsen MW, Burgdorf KS, Ullum H, Hansen TF, Middleton A, et al. Psychiatric stakeholders and their attitudes toward receiving pertinent findings and incidents in genomic research. Am J Med Genet A 2017;173:2649–58.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • AlFayyad I, Al-Tannir M, Abu-Shaheen A, AlGhamdi S. To disclose or not to disclose? Perspectives of clinical genomics professionals regarding the return of incidental findings from genomic research. BMC Med Ethics 2021;22:101.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • de Wert G, Dondorp W, Clarke A, Dequeker EMC, Cordier C, Deans Z, et al. Opportunistic genomic screening. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur J Hum Genet. 2021;29:365–77.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Boycott K, Hartley T, Adam S, Bernier F, Chong K, Fernandez BA, et al. The clinical application of genomic sequencing for monogenic diseases in Canada: position statement from the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists. J Med Genet. 2015;52:431–7.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Massively parallel sequencing implementation guidelines. 2015. http://pathwiki.rcpaqap.com.au/pathwiki/index.php/Introduction. Last accessed on September 15, 2022.

  • Miller DT, Lee K, Abul-Husn NS, Amendola LM, Brothers K, Chung WK, et al. ACMG SF v3.2 List for Reporting Secondary Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing: A Policy Statement from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Geneta Med. 2023;25:100866.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Botkin JR, Belmont JW, Berg JS, Berkman BE, Bombard Y, Holm IA, et al. Points to consider: ethical, legal and psychosocial implications of genetic testing in children and adolescents. I’m J Hum Genet. 2015;97:6–21.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, Kalia SS, Korf BR, Martin CL, et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Geneta Med 2013;15:565–74.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • ACMG Board of Directors. ACMG policy statement: updated recommendations on analysis and reporting of secondary findings in clinical genome-scale sequencing. Geneta Med 2015;17:68–9.

    Google Scholar Article

  • Kalia SS, Adelman K, Bale SJ, Chung WK, Eng C, Evans JP, et al. Recommendations for reporting secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Geneta Med 2017;19:249–55.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Strande NT, Riggs ER, Buchanan AH, Ceyhan-Birsoy O, DiStefano M, Dwight SS. and others. Assessing the clinical validity of gene-disease associations: an evidence-based framework developed by the Clinical Genome Resource. I’m J Hum Genet. 2017;100:895–906.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Rehm HL, Berg JS, Brooks LD, Bustamante CD, Evans JP, Landrum MJ, et al. ClinGen – the clinical genome resource. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2235–42.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • DiStefano MT, Goehringer S, Babb L, Alkuraya FS, Amberger J, Amin M, et al. The Gene Curation Coalition: a global effort to harmonize genetic-disease evidence resources. Geneta Med 2022;24:1732–42.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Clause AR, Taylor JP, Rajkumar R, Bluske K, Bennett M, Amendola LM, et al. Reactive genetic curation to support interpretation and reporting of a clinical genome test for rare diseases: experience from over 1,000 cases. Cellular Genome. 2023;3:100258.

    CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, Bick D, Das S, Gastier-Foster J, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Geneta Med 2015;17:405–24.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Brandt T, Sack LM, Arjona D, Tan D, Mei H, Cui H, et al. Adaptation of the ACMG/AMP sequence variant classification guidelines for single gene copy number variants. Geneta Med 2020;22:336–44.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Riggs ER, Andersen EF, Cherry AM, Kantarci S, Kearney H, Patel A, et al. Technical standards for the interpretation and reporting of constitutional copy number variants: a joint consensus recommendation from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen). Geneta Med 2020;22:245–57.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • McCormick EM, Lott MT, Dulik MC, Shen L, Attimonelli M, Vitale O, et al. Specifications of ACMG/AMP standards and guidelines for interpretation of mitochondrial DNA variants. Hum Mutat. 2020;41:2028–57.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  • Berg JS, Foreman AKM, O’Daniel JM, Booker JK, Boshe L, Carey T, et al. A semiquantitative metric to assess the clinical actionability of incidental or secondary findings from genome-scale sequencing. Geneta Med 2016;18:467–75.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Library. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/. Last accessed in 2023.

  • NCCN. National Comprehensive Cancer Network – Home page. https://www.nccn.org. Last accessed in 2023.

  • PubMed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.

  • Google. https://www.google.com/.

  • Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.com/.

  • Adam MP, Feldman J, Mirzaa GM, Pagon RA, Wallace SE, Bean LJ, et al., editors. GeneReviews®. Seattle, WA: University of Washington; 1993. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1116/.

  • Miller DT, Lee K, Chung WK, Gordon AS, Herman GE, Klein TE, et al. ACMG SF v3.0 List for Reporting Secondary Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing: A Policy Statement from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Geneta Med 2021;23:1381–90.

    PubMed Google Scholar Article

  • Miller DT, Lee K, Abul-Husn NS, Amendola LM, Brothers K, Chung WK, et al. ACMG SF v3.1 List for Reporting Secondary Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing: A Policy Statement from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Geneta Med 2022;24:1407–14.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Elfatih A, Mohammed I, Abdelrahman D, Mifsud B. Frequency and management of clinically actionable incidental findings from genome and exome sequencing data: a systematic review. Physiological Genome. 2021;53:373–84.

    CAS Google Scholar Article

  • Nambot S, Sawka C, Bertolone G, Cosset E, Goussot V, Derangère V, et al. Incidental findings in a series of 2,500 genetic panel tests for a genetic predisposition to cancer: results and impact on patients. Eur J Med Genet. 2021;64:104196.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Cheung F, Birch P, Friedman JM, Elliott AM, Adam S, CAUSES study, et al. The long-term impact of receiving incidental findings on parents undergoing genome sequencing. J Genet Couns. 2022;31. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35128755/.

  • Hart MR, Biesecker BB, Blout CL, Christensen KD, Amendola LM, Bergstrom KL, et al. Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and healthcare costs from a multicenter study. Geneta Med. 2019;21. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30287922/.

  • Landrum MJ, Lee JM, Benson M, Brown GR, Chao C, Chitipiralla S, et al. ClinVar: improving access to variant interpretations and supporting evidence. Nucleic Acids Res 2018;46:D1062–7.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Cappellini MD, Fiorelli G. Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency. Lancet. 2008;371:64–74.

    CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *