美国临床外显子组和基因组再分析的现状

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Michelle Frees, Jennefer N. Carter, Matthew T. Wheeler, Chloe Reuter
{"title":"美国临床外显子组和基因组再分析的现状","authors":"Michelle Frees, Jennefer N. Carter, Matthew T. Wheeler, Chloe Reuter","doi":"10.1002/jgc4.1968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The majority of patients undergoing exome or genome sequencing receive a nondiagnostic result. Periodic reanalysis is known to increase diagnostic yield from exome sequencing, yet laboratory reanalysis practices are obscure. We sought to define the landscape of exome and genome reanalysis across clinical laboratories. Genetic testing registries were queried to identify eligible clinical genetic laboratories offering exome and/or genome sequencing in the United States. A survey administered to lab representatives investigated reanalysis offerings, policies, perceived uptake, bioinformatic steps, and billing options. The analysis consisted of descriptive statistics. Survey data were collected from 30 of 32 eligible laboratories (93%), comprising 28 exome products and 13 genome products. Reanalysis was widely available for both exomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 27/28, 96%) and genomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 12/13, 92%). Most participating laboratories required ordering providers to initiate reanalysis (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 24/28, 86%). Most respondents estimated providers initiated reanalysis in less than 10% of all exomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 12/22) or genomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 6/9) sequenced. The approach to reanalysis varied greatly by laboratory. Laboratory approaches to exome and genome reanalysis are highly variable and typically require provider initiation. This could contribute to low reanalysis uptake and increased administrative burden on providers. Further work should emphasize development of clinical exome and genome reanalysis standards.","PeriodicalId":54829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The current landscape of clinical exome and genome reanalysis in the U.S.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Frees, Jennefer N. Carter, Matthew T. Wheeler, Chloe Reuter\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jgc4.1968\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The majority of patients undergoing exome or genome sequencing receive a nondiagnostic result. Periodic reanalysis is known to increase diagnostic yield from exome sequencing, yet laboratory reanalysis practices are obscure. We sought to define the landscape of exome and genome reanalysis across clinical laboratories. Genetic testing registries were queried to identify eligible clinical genetic laboratories offering exome and/or genome sequencing in the United States. A survey administered to lab representatives investigated reanalysis offerings, policies, perceived uptake, bioinformatic steps, and billing options. The analysis consisted of descriptive statistics. Survey data were collected from 30 of 32 eligible laboratories (93%), comprising 28 exome products and 13 genome products. Reanalysis was widely available for both exomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 27/28, 96%) and genomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 12/13, 92%). Most participating laboratories required ordering providers to initiate reanalysis (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 24/28, 86%). Most respondents estimated providers initiated reanalysis in less than 10% of all exomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 12/22) or genomes (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 6/9) sequenced. The approach to reanalysis varied greatly by laboratory. Laboratory approaches to exome and genome reanalysis are highly variable and typically require provider initiation. This could contribute to low reanalysis uptake and increased administrative burden on providers. Further work should emphasize development of clinical exome and genome reanalysis standards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Genetic Counseling\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Genetic Counseling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1968\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1968","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数接受外显子组或基因组测序的患者得到的结果都是非诊断性的。众所周知,定期再分析可提高外显子组测序的诊断率,但实验室再分析的做法并不明确。我们试图确定临床实验室外显子组和基因组再分析的情况。我们查询了基因检测注册表,以确定美国提供外显子组和/或基因组测序的合格临床基因实验室。对实验室代表进行了一项调查,调查内容包括再分析产品、政策、认知度、生物信息步骤和计费选项。分析包括描述性统计。在 32 家符合条件的实验室中,有 30 家(93%)收集到了调查数据,包括 28 个外显子组产品和 13 个基因组产品。外显子组(n = 27/28,96%)和基因组(n = 12/13,92%)的再分析都很普遍。大多数参与调查的实验室要求订购服务提供者启动再分析(n = 24/28,86%)。大多数受访者估计,在所有外显子组(n = 12/22)或基因组(n = 6/9)测序中,只有不到 10% 的提供者会启动再分析。不同实验室的再分析方法差别很大。实验室进行外显子组和基因组再分析的方法差异很大,通常需要提供者主动提出。这可能会导致重新分析的采用率较低,并加重医疗服务提供者的行政负担。进一步的工作应强调制定临床外显子组和基因组再分析标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The current landscape of clinical exome and genome reanalysis in the U.S.
The majority of patients undergoing exome or genome sequencing receive a nondiagnostic result. Periodic reanalysis is known to increase diagnostic yield from exome sequencing, yet laboratory reanalysis practices are obscure. We sought to define the landscape of exome and genome reanalysis across clinical laboratories. Genetic testing registries were queried to identify eligible clinical genetic laboratories offering exome and/or genome sequencing in the United States. A survey administered to lab representatives investigated reanalysis offerings, policies, perceived uptake, bioinformatic steps, and billing options. The analysis consisted of descriptive statistics. Survey data were collected from 30 of 32 eligible laboratories (93%), comprising 28 exome products and 13 genome products. Reanalysis was widely available for both exomes (n = 27/28, 96%) and genomes (n = 12/13, 92%). Most participating laboratories required ordering providers to initiate reanalysis (n = 24/28, 86%). Most respondents estimated providers initiated reanalysis in less than 10% of all exomes (n = 12/22) or genomes (n = 6/9) sequenced. The approach to reanalysis varied greatly by laboratory. Laboratory approaches to exome and genome reanalysis are highly variable and typically require provider initiation. This could contribute to low reanalysis uptake and increased administrative burden on providers. Further work should emphasize development of clinical exome and genome reanalysis standards.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Journal of Genetic Counseling GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
26.30%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Genetic Counseling (JOGC), published for the National Society of Genetic Counselors, is a timely, international forum addressing all aspects of the discipline and practice of genetic counseling. The journal focuses on the critical questions and problems that arise at the interface between rapidly advancing technological developments and the concerns of individuals and communities at genetic risk. The publication provides genetic counselors, other clinicians and health educators, laboratory geneticists, bioethicists, legal scholars, social scientists, and other researchers with a premier resource on genetic counseling topics in national, international, and cross-national contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信