22 research outputs found

    Is “incidental finding” the best term?: a study of patients’ preferences

    Get PDF
    There is debate within the genetics community about the optimal term to describe genetic variants unrelated to the test indication, but potentially important for health. Given the lack of consensus and the importance of adopting terminology that promotes effective clinical communication, we sought the opinion of clinical genetics patients

    Rare loss of function variants in candidate genes and risk of colorectal cancer

    Get PDF
    Although ~ 25% of colorectal cancer or polyp (CRC/P) cases show familial aggregation, current germline genetic testing identifies a causal genotype in the 16 major genes associated with high penetrance CRC/P in only 20% of these cases. As there are likely other genes underlying heritable CRC/P, we evaluated the association of variation at novel loci with CRC/P. We evaluated 158 a priori selected candidate genes by comparing the number of rare potentially disruptive variants (PDVs) found in 84 CRC/P cases without an identified CRC/P risk-associated variant and 2440 controls. We repeated this analysis using an additional 73 CRC/P cases. We also compared the frequency of PDVs in select genes among CRC/P cases with two publicly available data sets. We found a significant enrichment of PDVs in cases vs. controls: 20% of cases vs. 11.5% of controls with ≥ 1 PDV (OR = 1.9, p = 0.01) in the original set of cases. Among the second cohort of CRC/P cases, 18% had a PDV, significantly different from 11.5% (p = 0.02). Logistic regression, adjusting for ancestry and multiple testing, indicated association between CRC/P and PDVs in NTHL1 (p = 0.0001), BRCA2 (p = 0.01) and BRIP1 (p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference in the frequency of PDVs at each of these genes between all 157 CRC/P cases and two publicly available data sets. These results suggest an increased presence of PDVs in CRC/P cases and support further investigation of the association of NTHL1, BRCA2 and BRIP1 variation with CRC/P

    Dominant-negative variant in SLC1A4 causes an autosomal dominant epilepsy syndrome.

    Get PDF
    SLC1A4 is a trimeric neutral amino acid transporter essential for shuttling L-serine from astrocytes into neurons. Individuals with biallelic variants in SLC1A4 are known to have spastic tetraplegia, thin corpus callosum, and progressive microcephaly (SPATCCM) syndrome, but individuals with heterozygous variants are not thought to have disease. We identify an 8-year-old patient with global developmental delay, spasticity, epilepsy, and microcephaly who has a de novo heterozygous three amino acid duplication in SLC1A4 (L86_M88dup). We demonstrate that L86_M88dup causes a dominant-negative N-glycosylation defect of SLC1A4, which in turn reduces the plasma membrane localization of SLC1A4 and the transport rate of SLC1A4 for L-serine

    Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine

    Get PDF
    Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine

    Is “incidental finding” the best term?: a study of patients’ preferences

    No full text
    PURPOSE: There is debate within the genetics community about the optimal term to describe genetic variants unrelated to the test indication, but potentially important for health. Given the lack of consensus and the importance of adopting terminology that promotes effective clinical communication, we sought the opinion of clinical genetics patients. METHODS: Surveys and focus groups with two patient populations were conducted. Eighty-eight survey participants were asked to rank four terms according to how well each describes results unrelated to the test indication: incidental findings, secondary findings, additional findings, and ancillary findings. Participants in six focus groups were guided through a free-thought exercise to describe desired attributes of such a term, and then asked to formulate a best term to represent this concept. RESULTS: The term additional findings had the most first choice rankings by survey participants, followed by secondary findings, incidental findings, and ancillary findings. Most focus group participants preferred the term additional findings; they also described reasons why other terms were not optimal. CONCLUSION: Additional findings was preferred as both more neutral and accessible than other terms currently in use. Patient perceptions and comprehension will be framed by the terminology. Thus, patient opinions should be considered by medical genetics professionals

    Rare loss of function variants in candidate genes and risk of colorectal cancer

    No full text
    © 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Although ~ 25% of colorectal cancer or polyp (CRC/P) cases show familial aggregation, current germline genetic testing identifies a causal genotype in the 16 major genes associated with high penetrance CRC/P in only 20% of these cases. As there are likely other genes underlying heritable CRC/P, we evaluated the association of variation at novel loci with CRC/P. We evaluated 158 a priori selected candidate genes by comparing the number of rare potentially disruptive variants (PDVs) found in 84 CRC/P cases without an identified CRC/P risk-associated variant and 2440 controls. We repeated this analysis using an additional 73 CRC/P cases. We also compared the frequency of PDVs in select genes among CRC/P cases with two publicly available data sets. We found a significant enrichment of PDVs in cases vs. controls: 20% of cases vs. 11.5% of controls with ≥ 1 PDV (OR = 1.9, p = 0.01) in the original set of cases. Among the second cohort of CRC/P cases, 18% had a PDV, significantly different from 11.5% (p = 0.02). Logistic regression, adjusting for ancestry and multiple testing, indicated association between CRC/P and PDVs in NTHL1 (p = 0.0001), BRCA2 (p = 0.01) and BRIP1 (p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference in the frequency of PDVs at each of these genes between all 157 CRC/P cases and two publicly available data sets. These results suggest an increased presence of PDVs in CRC/P cases and support further investigation of the association of NTHL1, BRCA2 and BRIP1 variation with CRC/P
    corecore