RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Novel uses of genome sequencing (GS) present an opportunity for return of results to healthy individuals, prompting the need for scalable genetic counseling strategies. We evaluate the effectiveness of a genomic counseling model (GCM) and explore preferences for GS findings in the general population. METHODS: Participants (N=466) completed GS and our GCM (digital genomics platform and group-based webinar), and indicated results preferences. Surveys were administered pre- (T0) and post- (T1) GCM. Change in knowledge and decisional conflict (DC) were evaluated using paired-sample T and Wilcoxon tests. Factors influencing knowledge and results preferences were evaluated using linear and logistic regression models. RESULTS: Participants were 56% female, 58% white, and 53% ≥40 years of age. Mean knowledge scores increased (Limitations: 3.73 to 5.63; benefits: 3.73 to 5.48, p<0.0001) and DC decreased (-21.9, p<0.0001) at T1 versus T0. Eighty-six percent of participants wished to learn all GS findings at T1 vs 78% at T0 (p<0.0001). Older age, negative/mixed attitudes toward genetics, and greater DC were associated with change in preferences post-intervention. CONCLUSION: In a population-based cohort undergoing GS interested in learning GS findings, our GCM increased knowledge and reduced DC, illustrating the GCM's potential effectiveness for GS counseling in the general population.

RESUMEN

The development of massively parallel sequencing-based genomic sequencing tests has increased genetic test availability and access. The field and practice of genetic counseling have adapted in response to this paradigm-shifting technology and the subsequent transition to practicing genomic medicine. While the key elements defining genetic counseling remain relevant, genetic counseling service delivery models and practice settings have evolved. Genetic counselors are addressing the challenges of direct-to-consumer and consumer-driven genetic testing, and genetic counseling training programs are responding to the ongoing increased demand for genetic counseling services across a broadening range of contexts. The need to diversify both the patient and participant groups with access to genetic information, as well as the field of genetic counseling, is at the forefront of research and training program initiatives. Genetic counselors are key stakeholders in the genomics era, and their contributions are essential to effectively and equitably deliver precision medicine.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Counseling after consumer-driven whole exome sequencing (WES) and whole genome sequencing (WGS) presents challenges for genetic counselors as availability of this testing increases. There are no standard practice guidelines and limited resources for genetic counselors in this area, but consumer demand for counseling and data interpretation exists and is likely to grow along with testing opportunities. In this paper, we comment upon our experiences as three independent, private practice genetic counselors who have provided counseling services for clients with WES/WGS reports and data. In our counseling experience, we have encountered three main types of client motivation for seeking testing and counseling: generally healthy individuals who are curious to learn more about their genomic data, individuals with family histories of various conditions, and/or who want to better understand specific disease risks, and individuals who are ill, undiagnosed and searching for an understanding of their ailments. Research is needed to better understand client motivations for undergoing testing and counseling, as well outcomes of counseling sessions. In addition to improvements in variant identification, classification and bioinformatics, there is a need for practice guidelines, counseling resources, service delivery models, and efforts to increase awareness and access to genetic counseling services.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

With the advent of widespread genomic testing for diagnostic indications and disease risk assessment, there is increased need to optimize genetic counseling services to support the scalable delivery of precision medicine. Here, we describe how we operationalized the reciprocal engagement model of genetic counseling practice to develop a framework of counseling components and strategies for the delivery of genomic results. This framework was constructed based upon qualitative research with patients receiving genomic counseling following online receipt of potentially actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomics reports. Consultation with a transdisciplinary group of investigators, including practicing genetic counselors, was sought to ensure broad scope and applicability of these strategies for use with any large-scale genomic testing effort. We preserve the provision of pre-test education and informed consent as established in Mendelian/single-gene disease genetic counseling practice. Following receipt of genomic results, patients are afforded the opportunity to tailor the counseling agenda by selecting the specific test results they wish to discuss, specifying questions for discussion, and indicating their preference for counseling modality. The genetic counselor uses these patient preferences to set the genomic counseling session and to personalize result communication and risk reduction recommendations. Tailored visual aids and result summary reports divide areas of risk (genetic variant, family history, lifestyle) for each disease to facilitate discussion of multiple disease risks. Post-counseling, session summary reports are actively routed to both the patient and their physician team to encourage review and follow-up. Given the breadth of genomic information potentially resulting from genomic testing, this framework is put forth as a starting point to meet the need for scalable genetic counseling services in the delivery of precision medicine.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of 'genomic counseling' on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants' informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants' satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = -4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.

Asunto(s)