Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts
Michael D. LindermaniD, Sophia M. AdelsoniD, Tala M. Berro, Jennifer L. Anderson, Scott D. CrawfordiD, Tshaka J. Cunningham, Edward D. EspliniD, Altovise T. EwingiD, Daiva E. Nielsen, Stacey PereiraiD, Tara SchmidleniD, Heather Andrighetti, Steven B. Bleyl, George McDonald ChurchiD, Eden V. HaverfieldiD, Madhuri HegdeiD, Lazaridis N. Konstantinos, Paul Stephen KruszkaiD, Debra G. B. LeonardiD, Thomas MayiD, Molly A. McGinnissiD, Vaibhav Pandya, Eric E. SchadtiD, Bastian Greshake TzovarasiD, Bethany ZettleriD, , Anthony Johnson
Abstract
PurposeElective genomic sequencing (EGS) returns monogenic disease findings in multiple genes, including potentially novel variants, and may also provide participants with carrier status, pharmacogenomic and other health-related information. The PeopleSeq Study assessed participants motivations for and concerns about EGS and the associated clinical and psychosocial outcomes across diverse EGS providers. MethodsWe administered a shared questionnaire to participants who chose to undergo EGS via 18 academic, clinical, or commercial EGS platforms. ResultsWe enrolled 1575 participants, of whom 1147 (72.8%) completed a questionnaire after receiving their EGS results. A majority (60.3%) of the participants who completed a post-result questionnaire self-reported receiving results they assessed as important, including negative findings, and 75.9% reported a form of health-related utility. Among a subset (19.4%) who shared their EGS reports, 16.6% (37 of n=223) received a monogenic finding and self-reported results deemed "important" were consistent with EGS reports. Most participants (74.1%) discussed their results with their family, but fewer discussed their results with a healthcare provider other than the site team (41.7%) or had one or more medical visits as a direct result of their EGS testing (23.1%). Participants expressed diverse motivations for EGS, with 91.4% expressing interest in their personal disease risk and 54% who expressed quasi-indication-based motivations related to family medical history. Individuals motivated by family history reported important results at a significantly higher rate. ConclusionsEarly adopters of EGS are motivated by general interest in their health as well as quasi-indication-based considerations such as family history. A majority of participants learned results they considered medically important, but a much smaller segment engaged healthcare providers with their results.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Field percentile
- 47th percentile
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Who defines the "personal utility" of genetic and genomic testing? A systematic review
Emily G. Miller, Jennifer Louise Young, … Meghan C. Halley·medRxiv·Dec 4, 2022
- Diverse Participant Recruitment for Infant Sequencing in the BabySeq Project
Maya C. del Rosario, Sheyenne A. Walmsley, … Stacey Pereira·medRxiv·Oct 1, 2024
- A Model for Genome-First Care: Returning Secondary Genomic Findings to Participants and Their Healthcare Providers in a Large Research Cohort
Marci L.B. Schwartz, Cara Zayac McCormick, … Michael F. Murray·The American Journal of Human GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Aug 9, 2018
- Family History Assessment Significantly Enhances Delivery of Precision Medicine in the Genomics Era
Yasmin M. Bylstra, Weng Khong Lim, … Patrick B. O. Tan·Genome MedicinePeer-reviewed·Jan 7, 2021
- European Autism GEnomics Registry (EAGER): Protocol for a multicentre cohort study and registry
Madeleine Bloomfield, Alexandra Lautarescu, … Tony Charman·BMJ OpenPeer-reviewed·Jun 1, 2024
- Exploring the feasibility, acceptability and impact of genomic newborn screening for rare diseases in England: A study protocol for the Generation Study - Process and Impact Evaluation
Celine Lewis, Emma Beecham, … Melissa K. Hill·Yearbook of pediatric endocrinologyPeer-reviewed·Sep 3, 2026