指导基因组测序二次结果的选择、分析和临床管理的国际政策:系统综述。

IF 8.1 1区 生物学 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY
American journal of human genetics Pub Date : 2024-10-03 Epub Date: 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012
Safa Majeed, Christine Johnston, Saumeh Saeedi, Chloe Mighton, Vanessa Rokoszak, Ilham Abbasi, Sonya Grewal, Vernie Aguda, Ashby Kissoondoyal, David Malkin, Yvonne Bombard
{"title":"指导基因组测序二次结果的选择、分析和临床管理的国际政策:系统综述。","authors":"Safa Majeed, Christine Johnston, Saumeh Saeedi, Chloe Mighton, Vanessa Rokoszak, Ilham Abbasi, Sonya Grewal, Vernie Aguda, Ashby Kissoondoyal, David Malkin, Yvonne Bombard","doi":"10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Secondary findings (SFs) from genomic sequencing can have significant impacts on patient health, yet existing practices guiding their clinical investigation are inconsistent. We systematically reviewed existing SFs policies to identify variations and gaps in guidance. We cataloged and appraised international policies from academic databases (n = 5, inception-02/2022) and international human genetic societies (n = 64; inception-05/2022), across the continuum of SFs selection, analysis, and clinical management. We assessed quality using AGREE-II and interpreted results using qualitative description. Of the 63 SFs policies identified, most pertained to clinical management of SFs (98%; n = 62; primarily consent and disclosure), some guided SFs analysis (60%; n = 38), while fewer mentioned SFs selection (48%; n = 30). Overall, policies recommend (1) identifying clinically actionable, pathogenic variants with high positive predictive values for disease (selection), (2) bioinformatically filtering variants using evidence-informed gene lists (analysis), and (3) discussing with affected individuals the SFs identified, their penetrance, expressivity, medical implications, and management (clinical management). Best practices for SFs variant analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up (i.e., surveillance, treatment, etc.) were minimally described. Upon quality assessment, policies were highly rated for scope and clarity (median score, 69) but were limited by their rigor and applicability (median scores, 27 and 25). Our review represents a comprehensive international synthesis of policy guiding SFs across the continuum of selection, analysis, and clinical management. Our synthesis will help providers navigate critical decision points in SFs investigation, although significant work is needed to address gaps in SFs analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up processes and to support evidence-based practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":7659,"journal":{"name":"American journal of human genetics","volume":" ","pages":"2079-2093"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11480791/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Safa Majeed, Christine Johnston, Saumeh Saeedi, Chloe Mighton, Vanessa Rokoszak, Ilham Abbasi, Sonya Grewal, Vernie Aguda, Ashby Kissoondoyal, David Malkin, Yvonne Bombard\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Secondary findings (SFs) from genomic sequencing can have significant impacts on patient health, yet existing practices guiding their clinical investigation are inconsistent. We systematically reviewed existing SFs policies to identify variations and gaps in guidance. We cataloged and appraised international policies from academic databases (n = 5, inception-02/2022) and international human genetic societies (n = 64; inception-05/2022), across the continuum of SFs selection, analysis, and clinical management. We assessed quality using AGREE-II and interpreted results using qualitative description. Of the 63 SFs policies identified, most pertained to clinical management of SFs (98%; n = 62; primarily consent and disclosure), some guided SFs analysis (60%; n = 38), while fewer mentioned SFs selection (48%; n = 30). Overall, policies recommend (1) identifying clinically actionable, pathogenic variants with high positive predictive values for disease (selection), (2) bioinformatically filtering variants using evidence-informed gene lists (analysis), and (3) discussing with affected individuals the SFs identified, their penetrance, expressivity, medical implications, and management (clinical management). Best practices for SFs variant analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up (i.e., surveillance, treatment, etc.) were minimally described. Upon quality assessment, policies were highly rated for scope and clarity (median score, 69) but were limited by their rigor and applicability (median scores, 27 and 25). Our review represents a comprehensive international synthesis of policy guiding SFs across the continuum of selection, analysis, and clinical management. Our synthesis will help providers navigate critical decision points in SFs investigation, although significant work is needed to address gaps in SFs analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up processes and to support evidence-based practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7659,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of human genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2079-2093\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11480791/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of human genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of human genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基因组测序的二次发现(SFs)可对患者的健康产生重大影响,但指导其临床调查的现有做法却不一致。我们系统地回顾了现有的SFs政策,以确定指导方面的差异和差距。我们对来自学术数据库(n = 5,始于 2022 年 2 月 2 日)和国际人类遗传学会(n = 64;始于 2022 年 5 月 5 日)的国际政策进行了编目和评估,涉及 SFs 的选择、分析和临床管理。我们使用 AGREE-II 评估质量,并使用定性描述解释结果。在已确定的 63 项 SFs 政策中,大多数涉及 SFs 的临床管理(98%;n = 62;主要是同意和披露),一些指导 SFs 分析(60%;n = 38),而较少提及 SFs 选择(48%;n = 30)。总体而言,政策建议:(1) 识别临床上可操作的、对疾病具有高阳性预测值的致病变异体(选择);(2) 使用有证据依据的基因列表对变异体进行生物信息筛选(分析);(3) 与受影响的个体讨论所识别的 SFs 及其渗透性、表达性、医学影响和管理(临床管理)。对 SFs 变异分析、临床验证和随访(即监测、治疗等)的最佳实践描述很少。在质量评估中,政策的范围和清晰度得到了高度评价(中位数为 69 分),但其严谨性和适用性受到了限制(中位数分别为 27 分和 25 分)。我们的综述是对指导 SFs 在选择、分析和临床管理等各个环节的政策进行的一次全面的国际综合。我们的综述将帮助医疗服务提供者把握 SFs 调查中的关键决策点,尽管还需要做大量工作来弥补 SFs 分析、临床验证和随访过程中的不足,并支持循证实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review.

Secondary findings (SFs) from genomic sequencing can have significant impacts on patient health, yet existing practices guiding their clinical investigation are inconsistent. We systematically reviewed existing SFs policies to identify variations and gaps in guidance. We cataloged and appraised international policies from academic databases (n = 5, inception-02/2022) and international human genetic societies (n = 64; inception-05/2022), across the continuum of SFs selection, analysis, and clinical management. We assessed quality using AGREE-II and interpreted results using qualitative description. Of the 63 SFs policies identified, most pertained to clinical management of SFs (98%; n = 62; primarily consent and disclosure), some guided SFs analysis (60%; n = 38), while fewer mentioned SFs selection (48%; n = 30). Overall, policies recommend (1) identifying clinically actionable, pathogenic variants with high positive predictive values for disease (selection), (2) bioinformatically filtering variants using evidence-informed gene lists (analysis), and (3) discussing with affected individuals the SFs identified, their penetrance, expressivity, medical implications, and management (clinical management). Best practices for SFs variant analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up (i.e., surveillance, treatment, etc.) were minimally described. Upon quality assessment, policies were highly rated for scope and clarity (median score, 69) but were limited by their rigor and applicability (median scores, 27 and 25). Our review represents a comprehensive international synthesis of policy guiding SFs across the continuum of selection, analysis, and clinical management. Our synthesis will help providers navigate critical decision points in SFs investigation, although significant work is needed to address gaps in SFs analysis, clinical validation, and follow-up processes and to support evidence-based practice.

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
CiteScore
14.70
自引率
4.10%
发文量
185
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Human Genetics (AJHG) is a monthly journal published by Cell Press, chosen by The American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) as its premier publication starting from January 2008. AJHG represents Cell Press's first society-owned journal, and both ASHG and Cell Press anticipate significant synergies between AJHG content and that of other Cell Press titles.
×
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