Provision of Genetic Services for Autism and its Impact on Spanish Families

Parental experiences and perspectives of healthcare providers' genetic testing recommendations for their children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder in the United States

Although genetic testing is recommended for all children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in the United States, it remains unclear how many parents have received and followed these recommendations. This study aimed to assess parental experiences and perspectives of healthcare providers' genetic testing recommendations. A total of 1043 parents of children with ASD from Simons Foundation Powering Autism Research for Knowledge completed an online survey. Only about one-third of the parents (34.2%) reported that their children's providers had recommended genetic testing. Factors associated with whether parents received these recommendations included the type of healthcare providers diagnosing ASD, parents' knowledge of genetic testing, the age of their children's diagnosis, and the presence of certain co-occurring medical conditions in their children. Our study also revealed that most parents (76.9%) who received recommendations had pursued genetic testing for their children. Adherence to the recommendations was associated with the characteristics of the parents (i.e., age and employment status) and children (i.e., gender), and their trust in the information from providers. The findings highlight the critical role of healthcare providers in facilitating genetic testing among families of children with ASD. Healthcare providers are recommended to increase their competencies and practice in providing genetic testing recommendations for ASD, assist parents in navigating testing challenges, and support parents through the testing process.

Exploring genetic testing requests, genetic alterations and clinical associations in a cohort of children with autism spectrum disorder

Several studies show great heterogeneity in the type of genetic test requested and in the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with ASD. The following study aims, firstly, to explore the factors that might influence professionals' decisions about the appropriateness of requesting genetic testing for their patients with ASD and, secondly, to determine the prevalence of genetic alterations in a representative sample of children with a diagnosis of ASD. Methods: We studied the clinical factors associated with the request for genetic testing in a sample of 440 children with ASD and the clinical factors of present genetic alterations. Even though the main guidelines recommend genetic testing all children with an ASD diagnosis, only 56% of children with an ASD diagnosis were genetically tested. The prevalence of genetic alterations was 17.5%. These alterations were more often associated with intellectual disability and dysmorphic features. There are no objective data to explicitly justify the request for genetic testing, nor are there objective data to justify requesting one genetic study versus multiple studies. Remarkably, only 28% of males were genetically tested with the recommended tests (fragile X and CMA). Children with dysmorphic features and organic comorbidities were more likely to be genetic tested than those without. Previous diagnosis of ASD (family history of ASD) and attendance at specialist services were also associated with Genetically tested Autism Spectrum Disorder GTASD. Our findings emphasize the importance of establishing algorithms to facilitate targeted genetic consultation for individuals with ASD who are likely to benefit, considering clinical phenotypes, efficiency, ethics, and benefits.

Factors Associated With Underutilization of Genetic Testing in Autism Spectrum Disorders

BACKGROUND

We sought to identify patient and provider factors associated with low completion of genetic testing, specifically chromosomal microarray (CMA), for autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

METHODS

Medical record review was conducted of children newly diagnosed with ASD without prior genetic testing at a single academic medical center from February 2015 through January 2016.

RESULTS

Only 41.9% of individuals with ASD completed CMA testing over at least 18 months from diagnosis (n = 140 of 334). Time to CMA completion varied, with a median of 86.5 days (interquartile range 2 to 214.5 days). Provider recommendation of genetic testing at the diagnostic visit and greater number of follow-up visits were associated with CMA completion. On multivariate regression, CMA completion was inversely associated with age (odds ratio [OR] = 0.8 for each year older, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7, 0.9; P = 0.001) and directly associated with intellectual disability or global developmental delay (OR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8; P = 0.004), first-degree relative with ASD (OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.0, 6.0; P = 0.044), and public insurance (OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.0, 2.9; P = 0.037). Parental concern and cost/insurance coverage were the most frequently documented barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Workflows to support early genetic testing recommendation and ordering soon after diagnosis may increase utilization, incorporating both family and provider perspectives. Genetic counseling highlighting the utility of genetic testing across the life span, phenotypic variability of genetic disorders, and possibility of de novo variants in ASD may also improve utilization.

Knowledge, attitudes and experiences of genetic testing for autism spectrum disorders among caregivers, patients, and health providers: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several genetic testing techniques have been recommended as a first-tier diagnostic tool in clinical practice for diagnosing autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, the actual usage rate varies dramatically. This is due to various reasons, including knowledge and attitudes of caregivers, patients, and health providers toward genetic testing. Several studies have therefore been conducted worldwide to investigate the knowledge, experiences, and attitudes toward genetic testing among caregivers of children with ASD, adolescent and adult ASD patients, and health providers who provide medical services for them. However, no systematic review has been done.

AIM

To systematically review research on knowledge, experiences, and attitudes towards genetic testing among caregivers of children with ASD, adolescent and adult ASD patients, and health providers.

METHODS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and searched the literature in three English language databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and PsychInfo) and two Chinese databases (CNKI and Wanfang). Searched literature was screened independently by two reviewers and discussed when inconsistency existed. Information on characteristics of the study, characteristics of participants, and main findings regarding knowledge, experience, and attitudes of caregivers of children with ASD, adolescent and adult ASD patients, and health providers concerning ASD genetic testing were extracted from included papers into a charting form for analysis.

RESULTS

We included 30 studies published between 2012 and 2022 and conducted in 9 countries. Most of the studies (n = 29) investigated caregivers of children with ASD, one study also included adolescent and adult patients, and two covered health providers. Most (51.0%-100%) of the caregivers/patients knew there was a genetic cause for ASD and 17.0% to 78.1% were aware of ASD genetic testing. However, they lacked full understanding of genetic testing. They acquired relevant and necessary information from physicians, the internet, ASD organizations, and other caregivers. Between 9.1% to 72.7% of caregivers in different studies were referred for genetic testing, and between 17.4% to 61.7% actually obtained genetic testing. Most caregivers agreed there are potential benefits following genetic testing, including benefits for children, families, and others. However, two studies compared perceived pre-test and post-test benefits with conflicting findings. Caregivers concerns included high costs, unhelpful results, negative influences (e.g., causing family conflicts, causing stress/risk/pain to children etc.) prevented some caregivers from using genetic testing. Nevertheless, 46.7% to 95.0% caregivers without previous genetic testing experience intended to obtain it in the future, and 50.5% to 59.6% of parents previously obtaining genetic testing would recommend it to other parents. In a single study of child and adolescent psychiatrists, 54.9% of respondents had ordered ASD genetic testing for their patients in the prior 12 mo, which was associated with greater knowledge of genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

Most caregivers are willing to learn about and use genetic testing. However, the review showed their current knowledge is limited and usage rates varied widely in different studies.

Access, utilization, and awareness for clinical genetic testing in autism spectrum disorder in Sweden: A survey study

Clinical genetic testing is recommended for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. There are only a few reports of how these recommendations are followed and especially missing for European countries. We aimed to analyze the rate of access, utilization, and awareness of clinical genetic testing among autistic individuals in Sweden through online surveys targeting parents with at least one autistic child and autistic adolescents (from 15 years) and adults. In total, 868 parents of autistic children and 213 autistic adolescents or adults completed the survey. Only 9.1% (n = 79) of parents and 2.8% (n = 6) of autistic adolescents/adults reported having received a referral for clinical genetic testing after autism spectrum disorder diagnosis. The autistic children offered a referral were younger at diagnosis (p < 0.001) and more likely to have an additional neurodevelopmental diagnosis (p < 0.01), including intellectual disability (p < 0.001) or a language disorder (p < 0.001). Genetic counseling was provided to less than half of the families that were referred for clinical genetic testing. Finally, we report that both respondent groups preferred to be informed by written text and an expert in genetics about clinical genetic testing. This study highlights a lack of awareness and access to clinical genetic testing after autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in Sweden and demonstrates the need for additional studies on how clinical guidelines for genetic testing are followed in different countries.

Utilization and uptake of clinical genetics services in high-income countries: A scoping review

Ongoing rapid growth in the need for genetic services has the potential to severely strain the capacity of the clinical genetics workforce to deliver this care. Unfortunately, assessments of the scale of this health policy challenge and potential solutions are hampered by the lack of a consolidated evidence base on the growth in genetic service utilization. To enable health policy research and strategic planning by health systems in this area, we conducted a scoping review of the literature on the utilization and uptake of clinical genetics services in high-income countries published between 2010 and 2018. One-hundred-and-ninety-five unique studies were included in the review. Most focused on cancer (85/195; 44%) and prenatal care (50/195; 26%), which are consistently the two areas with the greatest volume of genetic service utilization in both the United States and other high-income countries. Utilization and uptake rates varied considerably and were influenced by contextual factors including health system characteristics, provider knowledge, and patient preferences. Moreover, growth in genetic service utilization appears to be driven to a significant degree by technological advances and the integration of new tests into clinical care. Our review highlights both the policy challenge posed by the rapid growth in the utilization of genetic services and the variability in this trend across clinical indications and health systems.

Genetic Testing in Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Neurodevelopmental disorders are the most prevalent chronic medical conditions encountered in pediatric primary care. In addition to identifying appropriate descriptive diagnoses and guiding families to evidence-based treatments and supports, comprehensive care for individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders includes a search for an underlying etiologic diagnosis, primarily through a genetic evaluation. Identification of an underlying genetic etiology can inform prognosis, clarify recurrence risk, shape clinical management, and direct patients and families to condition-specific resources and supports. Here we review the utility of genetic testing in patients with neurodevelopmental disorders and describe the three major testing modalities and their yields - chromosomal microarray, exome sequencing (with/without copy number variant calling), and FMR1 CGG repeat analysis for fragile X syndrome. Given the diagnostic yield of genetic testing and the potential for clinical and personal utility, there is consensus that genetic testing should be offered to all patients with global developmental delay, intellectual disability, and/or autism spectrum disorder. Despite this recommendation, data suggest that a minority of children with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability have undergone genetic testing. To address this gap in care, we describe a structured but flexible approach to facilitate integration of genetic testing into clinical practice across pediatric specialties and discuss future considerations for genetic testing in neurodevelopmental disorders to prepare pediatric providers to care for patients with such diagnoses today and tomorrow.

Adaptation and validation of the Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale for autism spectrum disorders and related conditions

The genetics care pathway experienced by families affected by autism spectrum disorder (ASD) around the time of diagnosis is currently uncharacterized and potentially variable across contexts. The lack of consensus on outcome measures to capture the impact of genetic services for these families shows a gap in understanding and optimizing this genetics care pathway. The Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS‐24) is a validated outcome measure of clinical genetics services. The current study aims to adapt and validate the GCOS‐24 as an outcome measure in the context routine genetic testing in ASD and related conditions. Families seen for their child’s developmental evaluation for ASD and related conditions were invited to participate in a genomics cohort between 2016 and 2018. Families (n = 111) completed the mGCOS‐24 (modified GCOS‐24), adapted from the original GCOS‐24 by clinicians working in the target population’s routine care pathway. The mGCOS‐24 has acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.84) and high test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.88). It also inversely correlates with stress as measured by Perceived Stress Scale (PSS‐10) and distress, as measured by the Distress Thermometer, rs ≥ 0.39, ps < 0.001. The mGCOS‐24 had adequate readability, as supported by cognitive interviews completed by a sub‐sample of five mothers of a child with ASD. Together, our findings show that the mGCOS‐24 has good validity for the target population. Preliminary characterization of the genetics care pathway in this population revealed remarkable variability in pre‐test counseling and limited post‐test counseling. The use of the mGCOS‐24 as an outcome measure is useful in filling some of these gaps by offering a way to assess, and in the future, optimize the genetics care pathway for families affected by autism and related neurodevelopmental conditions.

[Twenty years of on-site clinical genetics consultations for people with ASD]

Despite advances in neurogenetics of autism spectrum disorders (ASD), many patients fail to be systematically investigated, owing to preconceived ideas, limited access to genetics facilities and inadequacy of consultations to children with behavioural problems. To improve access to services, we reversed the paradigm and delivered on-site genetics consultations to ASD children of Greater Paris day care hospitals and specialized institutions. Since 1998, an ambulatory medical genetics team has been in operation, offering on-site consultations and services to patients and relatives in their usual environment. Because the mobile medical genetics unit operates under the umbrella of a university hospital, service laboratories were shared, including molecular cytogenetics and next generation sequencing (NGS). For the past 20 years, 502 patients from 26 institutions benefited from on-site consultations and genetics services in their usual environment. Less than 1 % of parents declined the offer. Previously undiagnosed genetics conditions were recognized in 71 ASD children, including pathogenic CNV variants (34/388 : 8.8 ; de novo : 19, inherited : 4), Fragile X (4/312 : 1.3 %) and deleterious variants in disease causing genes (33/141 ; 23.4 % : de novo : 23 ; inherited : 10, including 5 X-linked and 5 compound heterozygote mutations). Brain MRI were possible in 347 patients and 42 % were considered abnormal (146/347). All diagnosed patients presented atypical/syndromic ASD with moderate to severe intellectual disability. Thanks to such flexible organisation, a considerable number of missed consultations were tracked and families first benefited from medical genetics services. Owing to constraints imposed by behavioural problems in ASD, we suggest considering on-site genetics services to implement standard of care and counteract the loss of chance to patients and relatives.

Impact of on-site clinical genetics consultations on diagnostic rate in children and young adults with autism spectrum disorder

Background

Neurogenetics investigations and diagnostic yield in patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have significantly improved over the last few years. Yet, many patients still fail to be systematically investigated.

Methods

To improve access to services, an ambulatory team has been established since 1998, delivering on-site clinical genetics consultations and gradually upgrading services to 502 children and young adults with ASD in their standard environment across 26 day-care hospitals and specialized institutions within the Greater Paris region. The evaluation included a clinical genetics consultation, screening for fragile X syndrome, metabolic workup, chromosomal microarray analysis, and, in a proportion of patients, next-generation sequencing of genes reported in ASD and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Results

Fragile X syndrome and pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs) accounted for the disease in 10% of cases, including 4/312 (1.3%) with fragile X syndrome and 34/388 (8.8%) with pathogenic CNVs (19 de novo and 4 inherited). Importantly, adding high-throughput resequencing of reported intellectual disability/ASD genes to the screening procedure had a major impact on diagnostic yield in the 141 patients examined most recently. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic sequence variants in 27 disease genes were identified in 33/141 patients (23.4%; 23 were de novo and 10 inherited, including five X-linked and five recessive compound heterozygous variants). Diagnosed cases presented atypical and/or syndromic ASD with moderate to severe intellectual disability. The diagnostic yield of fragile X syndrome and array CGH testing combined with next-generation sequencing was significantly higher than fragile X syndrome and array CGH alone (p value 0.009). No inborn errors of metabolism were detected with the metabolic screening.

Conclusion

Based on the diagnostic rate observed in this cohort, we suggest that a stepwise procedure be considered, first screening pathogenic CNVs and a limited number of disease genes in a much larger number of patients, especially those with syndromic ASD and intellectual disability.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13229-019-0284-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Genetics and genetic counseling in psychiatry: Results from an opinion survey of professionals and users

Background

The heritability of several psychiatric disorders is high, and specific at‐risk variants have been identified. Therefore, genetic counseling and genetic testing can be prescribed to some psychiatric patients, but these services are not standardized for most of the population. The aims of the study were to gather opinions from mental health professionals and users regarding (a) the genetics of psychiatric disorders and (b) the usefulness of a genetic counseling unit in psychiatry.

Methods

The survey was conducted in the province of Tarragona (Spain), and we analyzed 152 valid questionnaires from professionals and 959 from users.

Results

Sixty‐one percent of professionals strongly believed that psychiatric disorders have a genetic basis, and 59% rated a genetic counseling unit in psychiatry as very or extremely useful. However, only a few professionals reported that patients asked them about the genetics of their diseases (12%) or the possibility of transmitting the disease to offspring (19%). Forty‐seven percent of users strongly believed that psychiatric disorders have a genetic basis, 30% responded that they talked with their families about the genetics of their diseases, and 43% were worried about transmitting the disease to offspring; however, only 14% reported that their psychiatrist had talked to them about this topic. Remarkably, 80% of users would consider a genetic counseling unit very or extremely useful.

Conclusions

The present study showed that mental health professionals were more aware of the genetic basis of psychiatric disorders than users, and both considered the implementation of a genetic counseling service very useful.