How does the genomic naive public perceive whole genomic testing for health purposes? A scoping review

Proxy panels enable privacy-aware outsourcing of genotype imputation

One of the major challenges in genomic data sharing is protecting participants' privacy in collaborative studies and in cases when genomic data are outsourced to perform analysis tasks, for example, genotype imputation services and federated collaborations genomic analysis. Although numerous cryptographic methods have been developed, these methods may not yet be practical for population-scale tasks in terms of computational requirements, rely on high-level expertise in security, and require each algorithm to be implemented from scratch. In this study, we focus on outsourcing of genotype imputation, a fundamental task that utilizes population-level reference panels, and develop protocols that rely on using "proxy panels" to protect genotype panels, whereas the imputation task is being outsourced at servers. The proxy panels are generated through a series of protection mechanisms such as haplotype sampling, allele hashing, and coordinate anonymization to protect the underlying sensitive panel's genetic variant coordinates, genetic maps, and chromosome-wide haplotypes. Although the resulting proxy panels are almost distinct from the sensitive panels, they are valid panels that can be used as input to imputation methods such as Beagle. We demonstrate that proxy-based imputation protects against well-known attacks with a minor decrease in imputation accuracy for variants in a wide range of allele frequencies.

Online Screening and Virtual Patient Education for Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment and Testing

OBJECTIVE

To use online screening and virtual patient education tools to improve the provision of hereditary cancer risk assessment.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, single-arm study in which clinicians at five U.S. community obstetrics and gynecology practices underwent an 8-week observation followed by 3-4 weeks of training on online patient screening and virtual patient education (prerecorded video with or without a genetic counselor phone call) for genetic testing-eligible patients. After a 4-week practice period, hereditary cancer risk assessment and patient education metrics were collected at 8 weeks and compared with preintervention metrics using univariate conditional logistic regression models stratified by site. The primary outcome was the change in genetic testing completion rate. Clinicians and patients were invited to complete a satisfaction survey.

RESULTS

A total of 5,795 and 5,135 patients were seen before and after the intervention, respectively. The proportion of screened patients meeting testing guidelines increased from 21.6% before the intervention to 28.2% after the intervention (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI, 1.26-1.47, P <.001). Guideline-eligible patients were significantly more likely to be offered genetic testing (59.1% vs 89.1%, OR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.87-2.27, P <.001), to submit a sample (32.9% vs 45.0%, OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.27-1.74, P <.001), and to complete testing (16.0% vs 34.2%, OR 2.38, 95% CI, 2.00-2.83, P <.001). Most clinicians agreed or strongly agreed that the screening tool improved the identification of patients meeting hereditary cancer risk assessment guidelines (92.1%), saved time (64.9%), and was easy to incorporate (68.4%) and that patient education improved their ability to deliver hereditary cancer risk assessment standard of care (84.2%). Most patients agreed or strongly agreed that virtual education helped them understand the purpose (91.7%) and implications (92.6%) of genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

A guideline-based online patient screening tool and virtual patient education were well received. The online tool enabled identification of significantly more guideline-eligible candidates for hereditary cancer risk assessment, and education improved patients' genetic literacy. Together, these tools ultimately improved the genetic testing completion rate.

Exploring Literacy and Knowledge Gaps and Disparities in Genetics and Oncogenomics Among Cancer Patients and the General Population: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Genetic and genomic literacy is pivotal in empowering cancer patients and citizens to navigate the complexities of omics sciences, resolve misconceptions surrounding clinical research and genetic/genomic testing, and make informed decisions about their health. In a fast-evolving scenario where routine testing has become widespread in healthcare, this scoping review sought to pinpoint existing gaps in literacy and understanding among cancer patients and the general public regarding genetics and genomics.

METHODS

Adhering to the PRISMA framework, the review included 43 studies published between January 2018 and June 2024, which evaluated the understanding of genetics and genomics among cancer patients, caregivers, and citizens.

RESULTS

Although the selected studies had significant heterogeneity in populations and evaluation tools, our findings indicate inadequate literacy levels, with citizens displaying lower proficiency than cancer patients and caregivers. This review highlighted consistent knowledge gaps in understanding the genetic and genomic underpinnings of diseases, encompassing misconceptions about mutation types and inheritance patterns, limited awareness of available genetic testing options, and difficulties in interpreting test results. Ethical and privacy concerns and the psychological impact of genetic testing were also common, highlighting the imperative need for effective communication between healthcare providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the dynamic nature of genomic science, the review underscores the need for continuously evolving educational programs tailored to diverse populations. Our findings could guide the development of educational resources addressed explicitly to cancer patients, caregivers, and the lay public.

Boundary-work in genomic medicine: Safeguarding the future of diagnostic next-generation sequencing in the clinic

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies - which allow to look at large parts or even the whole genome at once - are making their way into diagnostic clinical care. With trends towards 'mainstreaming' genetic services into general medicine, significant ethical challenges, and a disputed clinical utility and cost-benefit ratio, genomic medicine's autonomy and dominance in defining and offering NGS care may come under increased pressure from the outside (e.g., regulators, other healthcare providers and facilities, ethicists, and patients). In this paper, we show how the field of genomic medicine engages in substantial boundary-work in reaction to these circumstances. Building on multi-sited fieldwork in two centers for human genetics in Belgium and the Netherlands, we show how acts of demarcation serve to uphold an image of expertise and authority which helps maintain the field's autonomy and dominance. Through examining the delineations put forward in interviews, practice (based on observations in multidisciplinary meetings and consultations), and grey and academic literature, we show the politics involved in moving NGS forward fairly seamlessly in a way that suits the field. First, we show how genetic healthcare professionals have redefined what makes a genetic test 'valuable' so that it underlines its current value. Secondly, we examine how a genetic imaginary is put forward that both emphasizes the extraordinary character of genomic medicine and the normalcy of NGS testing. By underlining the need for their expertise whilst simultaneously normalizing the ethical challenges and positioning themselves as most capable of reflecting on these, the field minimized external regulation and kept a close grip on defining ethical issues and policy. Despite their current dominance in shaping the future of genomic care, we argue that the closedness of the field hinders it from benefiting from external expertise, reflection, and monitoring to ensure enduring and broad support for this future.

Determining priority indicators of utility for genomic testing in rare disease: A Delphi study

PURPOSE

Determining the value of genomic tests in rare disease necessitates a broader conceptualization of genomic utility beyond diagnostic yield. Despite widespread discussion, consensus toward which aspects of value to consider is lacking. This study aimed to use expert opinion to identify and refine priority indicators of utility in rare disease genomic testing.

METHODS

We used 2 survey rounds following Delphi methodology to obtain consensus on indicators of utility among experts involved in policy, clinical, research, and consumer advocacy leadership in Australia. We analyzed quantitative and qualitative data to identify, define, and determine priority indicators.

RESULTS

Twenty-five experts completed round 1 and 18 completed both rounds. Twenty indicators reached consensus as a priority in value assessment, including those relating to prognostic information, timeliness of results, practical and health care outcomes, clinical accreditation, and diagnostic yield. Whereas indicators pertaining to discovery research, disutility, and factors secondary to primary reason for testing were considered less of a priority and were removed.

CONCLUSION

This study obtained expert consensus on different utility indicators that are considered a priority in determining the value of genomic testing in rare disease in Australia. Indicators may inform a standardized approach to evidence generation and assessment to guide future research, decision making, and implementation efforts.

Economic evaluation of newborn deafness gene screening as a public health intervention in China: a modelling study

Background

While global newborn hearing screening programmes (NHSP) are far from the optimal level, the combined hearing and genetic screening has emerged as an innovative approach of early healthcare interventions. There is a clear need for economic evaluation to establish whether newborn deafness gene screening (NDGS), currently mandated by many cities in China, is a good investment.

Methods

A decision-tree model was constructed to simulate a hypothetical 10-million Chinese newborn cohort over a lifetime with three strategies: (1) no screening, (2) NHSP (standard screening) and (3) NHSP+NDGS (combined screening). The presence of permanent congenital hearing loss (PCHL) and genetic mutation were assigned at birth and held constant for all strategies. Input parameters were obtained from the Cohort of Deafness-gene Screening study and literature review. The government contract price for genetic screening was US$77/child. Outcomes of interest included the number of early diagnosed PCHL, prelingual deafness, total deafness, special education referral, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and benefit-cost ratio (BCR).

Results

Both standard and combined screening strategies were more effective and more costly than 'no screening'. Compared with standard screening, combined screening led to 9112 (28.0%) more PCHL cases early detected, avoiding 4071 (66.9%) prelingual deafness cases and 3977 (15.6%) special education referrals. The ICER and BCR for combined screening were US$ 4995/disability-adjusted life-year (95% uncertainty interval, 2963 to 9265) and 1.78 (1.19 to 2.39), from healthcare sector perspective. Combined screening would dominate standard screening from societal perspective. Moreover, it remained cost-effective even in pessimistic scenarios.

Conclusions

Our findings have particular implication for the 'scale-up' of genetic screening at the national level in China. The model may serve as a feasible example for hearing screening strategies in other countries, as well as genetic screening for other diseases.

Public attitudes, knowledge and educational needs toward genetic testing and omics sciences: a pilot survey conducted in Italy

Advancements in genomics have significant implications for public health, making citizens' education vital for informed decision-making. Based on two literature reviews' findings and a survey conducted with experts from the Italian Network of Genomics in Public Health, we conducted a pilot survey on Italian citizens' attitudes, knowledge and educational needs toward genetic testing and omics sciences. Our results demonstrate a widespread interest in genetic testing and uncertainties regarding associated risks, with 99% of participants acknowledging insufficient knowledge of genetic testing. There is an urgent need for educational tools to improve citizens' literacy and engagement in this rapidly evolving field.