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
Review
. 2022 May;42(6):697-704.
doi: 10.1002/pd.6097. Epub 2022 Jan 19.

A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: When and for whom?

Affiliations
Review

A framework for reporting secondary and incidental findings in prenatal sequencing: When and for whom?

Danya Vears et al. Prenat Diagn. 2022 May.

Abstract

As the use of genomic sequencing (GS) in the prenatal setting becomes more widespread, laboratories and clinicians will be tasked with making decisions about whether to offer incidental and secondary findings to expectant parents and, if so, which ones. Unfortunately, few guidelines or position statements issued by professional bodies address the return of secondary findings specifically in the context of prenatal GS, nor do they offer clear guidance on whether, and which types of incidental findings should be reported. Laboratories and clinicians will also need to navigate other challenges, such as how to obtain sufficiently informed consent, workload burdens for both laboratories and clinicians, and funding. Here we discuss these, and other challenges associated with offering incidental and secondary findings in the context of prenatal GS. We outline existing guidelines for return of these findings, prenatally and in children. We review the existing literature on stakeholder perspectives on return of incidental and secondary findings and discuss the main practical and ethical challenges that require consideration. We then propose a framework to help guide decision-making, suggesting a baseline routine analysis, with additional layers of analysis that could be offered, according to local laboratory policy, with additional opt-in consent from the parents.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Dugoff L, Norton ME, Kuller JA. The use of chromosomal microarray for prenatal diagnosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(4):B2‐B9. - PubMed
    1. van El CG, Cornel MC, Borry P, et al. Whole‐genome sequencing in health care: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013;21(6):580‐584. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vears DF, Sénécal K, Clarke AJ, et al. Points to consider for laboratories reporting results from diagnostic genomic sequencing. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018;26(1):36‐43. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kalia SS, Adelman K, Bale SJ, et al. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2017;19(2):249‐255. - PubMed
    1. Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med. 2013;15(7):565‐574. - PMC - PubMed