Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Sep 6;103(3):358-366.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.07.018. Epub 2018 Aug 16.

Evaluation of Recipients of Positive and Negative Secondary Findings Evaluations in a Hybrid CLIA-Research Sequencing Pilot

Collaborators, Affiliations

Evaluation of Recipients of Positive and Negative Secondary Findings Evaluations in a Hybrid CLIA-Research Sequencing Pilot

Julie C Sapp et al. Am J Hum Genet. .

Abstract

While consensus regarding the return of secondary genomic findings in the clinical setting has been reached, debate about such findings in the research setting remains. We developed a hybrid, research-clinical translational genomics process for research exome data coupled with a CLIA-validated secondary findings analysis. Eleven intramural investigators from ten institutes at the National Institutes of Health piloted this process. Nearly 1,200 individuals were sequenced and 14 secondary findings were identified in 18 participants. Positive secondary findings were returned by a genetic counselor following a standardized protocol, including referrals for specialty follow-up care for the secondary finding local to the participants. Interviews were undertaken with 13 participants 4 months after receipt of a positive report. These participants reported minimal psychologic distress within a process to assimilate their results. Of the 13, 9 reported accessing the recommended health care services. A sample of 107 participants who received a negative findings report were surveyed 4 months after receiving it. They demonstrated good understanding of the negative secondary findings result and most expressed reassurance (64%) from that report. However, a notable minority (up to 17%) expressed confusion regarding the distinction of primary from secondary findings. This pilot shows it is feasible to couple CLIA-compliant secondary findings to research sequencing with minimal harms. Participants managed the surprise of a secondary finding with most following recommended follow up, yet some with negative findings conflated secondary and primary findings. Additional work is needed to understand barriers to follow-up care and help participants distinguish secondary from primary findings.

Keywords: Mendelian genetic disorders; exome sequencing; incidental findings; psychologic aspects of genetic testing; secondary findings.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. United States Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2013). Anticipate and communicate: ethical management of incidental and secondary findings in the clinical, research, and direct-to-consumer contexts. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, Washington, D.C. - PubMed
    1. Jarvik G.P., Amendola L.M., Berg J.S., Brothers K., Clayton E.W., Chung W., Evans B.J., Evans J.P., Fullerton S.M., Gallego C.J., eMERGE Act-ROR Committee and CERC Committee. CSER Act-ROR Working Group Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2014;94:818–826. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wolf S.M., Burke W., Koenig B.A. Mapping the ethics of translational genomics: situating return of results and navigating the research-clinical divide. J. Law Med. Ethics. 2015;43:486–501. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wynn J., Martinez J., Duong J., Zhang Y., Phelan J., Fyer A., Klitzman R., Appelbaum P.S., Chung W.K. Association of researcher characteristics with views on return of incidental findings from genomic research. J. Genet. Couns. 2015;24:833–841. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bollinger J.M., Scott J., Dvoskin R., Kaufman D. Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genet. Med. 2012;14:451–457. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources