Variant Reinterpretation in Survivors of Cardiac Arrest With Preserved Ejection Fraction (the Cardiac Arrest Survivors With Preserved Ejection Fraction Registry) by Clinicians and Clinical Commercial Laboratories

The importance of variant reinterpretation in inherited cardiovascular diseases: Establishing the optimal timeframe

Inherited cardiovascular diseases are rare diseases that are difficult to diagnose by non-expert professionals. Genetic analyses play a key role in the diagnosis of these diseases, in which the identification of a pathogenic genetic variant is often a diagnostic criterion. Therefore, genetic variant classification and routine reinterpretation as data become available represent one of the main challenges associated with genetic analyses. Using the genetic variants identified in an inherited cardiovascular diseases unit during a 10-year period, the objectives of this study were: 1) to evaluate the impact of genetic variant reinterpretation, 2) to compare the reclassification rates between different cohorts of cardiac channelopathies and cardiomyopathies, and 3) to establish the most appropriate periodicity for genetic variant reinterpretation. All the evaluated cohorts (full cohort of inherited cardiovascular diseases, cardiomyopathies, cardiac channelopathies, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, Brugada syndrome, long QT syndrome and catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia) showed reclassification rates above 25%, showing even higher reclassification rates when there is definitive evidence of the association between the gene and the disease in the cardiac channelopathies. Evaluation of genetic variant reclassification rates based on the year of the initial classification showed that the most appropriate frequency for the reinterpretation would be 2 years, with the possibility of a more frequent reinterpretation if deemed convenient. To keep genetic variant classifications up to date, genetic counsellors play a critical role in the reinterpretation process, providing clinical evidence that genetic diagnostic laboratories often do not have at their disposal and communicating changes in classification and the potential implications of these reclassifications to patients and relatives.

Variant reclassification and clinical implications

Genomic technologies have transformed clinical genetic testing, underlining the importance of accurate molecular genetic diagnoses. Variant classification, ranging from benign to pathogenic, is fundamental to these tests. However, variant reclassification, the process of reassigning the pathogenicity of variants over time, poses challenges to diagnostic legitimacy. This review explores the medical and scientific literature available on variant reclassification, focusing on its clinical implications.Variant reclassification is driven by accruing evidence from diverse sources, leading to variant reclassification frequency ranging from 3.6% to 58.8%. Recent studies have shown that significant changes can occur when reviewing variant classifications within 1 year after initial classification, illustrating the importance of early, accurate variant assignation for clinical care.Variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are particularly problematic. They lack clear categorisation but have influenced patient treatment despite recommendations against it. Addressing VUS reclassification is essential to enhance the credibility of genetic testing and the clinical impact. Factors affecting reclassification include standardised guidelines, clinical phenotype-genotype correlations through deep phenotyping and ancestry studies, large-scale databases and bioinformatics tools. As genomic databases grow and knowledge advances, reclassification rates are expected to change, reducing discordance in future classifications.Variant reclassification affects patient diagnosis, precision therapy and family screening. The exact patient impact is yet unknown. Understanding influencing factors and adopting standardised guidelines are vital for precise molecular genetic diagnoses, ensuring optimal patient care and minimising clinical risk.

The genetic basis of apparently idiopathic ventricular fibrillation: a retrospective overview

AIMS

During the diagnostic work-up of patients with idiopathic ventricular fibrillation (VF), next-generation sequencing panels can be considered to identify genotypes associated with arrhythmias. However, consensus for gene panel testing is still lacking, and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) are often identified. The aim of this study was to evaluate genetic testing and its results in idiopathic VF patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We investigated 419 patients with available medical records from the Dutch Idiopathic VF Registry. Genetic testing was performed in 379 (91%) patients [median age at event 39 years (27-51), 60% male]. Single-gene testing was performed in 87 patients (23%) and was initiated more often in patients with idiopathic VF before 2010. Panel testing was performed in 292 patients (77%). The majority of causal (likely) pathogenic variants (LP/P, n = 56, 15%) entailed the DPP6 risk haplotype (n = 39, 70%). Moreover, 10 LP/P variants were found in cardiomyopathy genes (FLNC, MYL2, MYH7, PLN (two), TTN (four), RBM20), and 7 LP/P variants were identified in genes associated with cardiac arrhythmias (KCNQ1, SCN5A (2), RYR2 (four)). For eight patients (2%), identification of an LP/P variant resulted in a change of diagnosis. In 113 patients (30%), a VUS was identified. Broad panel testing resulted in a higher incidence of VUS in comparison to single-gene testing (38% vs. 3%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Almost all patients from the registry underwent, albeit not broad, genetic testing. The genetic yield of causal LP/P variants in idiopathic VF patients is 5%, increasing to 15% when including DPP6. In specific cases, the LP/P variant is the underlying diagnosis. A gene panel specifically for idiopathic VF patients is proposed.

Principles of Genetic Counseling in Inherited Heart Conditions

Cardiac genetic counseling is the process of helping individuals adapt to a personal diagnosis or family history of an inherited heart condition. The process is shown to benefit patients and includes specialized skills, such as counseling children and interpreting complex genetic results. Emerging areas include: evolving service delivery models for caring for patients and communicating risk to relatives, new areas of need including postmortem molecular autopsy, and new populations of individuals found to carry a likely pathogenic/pathogenic cardiac variant identified through genomic screening. This article provides an overview of the cardiac genetic counseling process and evolving areas in the field.

Perceived self-efficacy and empowerment in patients at increased risk of sudden cardiac arrest

Background

The role of multidisciplinary clinics for psychosocial care is increasingly recognized for those living with inherited cardiac conditions (ICC). In Canada, access to healthcare providers differ between clinics. Little is known about the relationship between access to specialty care and a patient's ability to cope with, and manage their condition.

Methods

We leveraged the Hearts in Rhythm Organization (HiRO) to conduct a cross-sectional, community-based survey of individuals with ICC and their family members. We aimed to describe access to services, and explore the relationships between participants' characteristics, cardiac history and self-reported health status and self-efficacy (GSE: General Self-Efficacy Scale) and empowerment (GCOS-24: Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale).

Results

We collected 235 responses from Canadian participants in 10 provinces and territories. Overall, 63% of participants reported involvement of a genetic counsellor in their care. Access to genetic testing was associated with greater empowerment [mean GCOS-24: 121.14 (SD = 20.53) vs. 105.68 (SD = 21.69); p = 0.004]. Uncertain genetic test results were associated with lower perceived self-efficacy (mean GSE: uncertain = 28.85 vs. positive = 33.16, negative = 34.13; p = 0.01). Low global mental health scores correlated with both lower perceived self-efficacy and empowerment scores, with only 11% of affected participants reporting involvement of psychology services in their care.

Conclusion

Differences in resource accessibility, clinical history and self-reported health status impact the perceived self-efficacy and empowerment of patients with ICC. Future research evaluating interventions to improve patient outcomes is recommended.

Sex Differences and Utility of Treadmill Testing in Long‐QT Syndrome

Background

Diagnosis of congenital long‐QT syndrome (LQTS) is complicated by phenotypic ambiguity, with a frequent normal‐to‐borderline resting QT interval. A 3‐step algorithm based on exercise response of the corrected QT interval (QTc) was previously developed to diagnose patients with LQTS and predict subtype. This study evaluated the 3‐step algorithm in a population that is more representative of the general population with LQTS with milder phenotypes and establishes sex‐specific cutoffs beyond the resting QTc.

Methods and Results

We identified 208 LQTS likely pathogenic or pathogenic KCNQ1 or KCNH2 variant carriers in the Canadian NLQTS (National Long‐QT Syndrome) Registry and 215 unaffected controls from the HiRO (Hearts in Rhythm Organization) Registry. Exercise treadmill tests were analyzed across the 5 stages of the Bruce protocol. The predictive value of exercise ECG characteristics was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to identify optimal cutoff values. A total of 78% of male carriers and 74% of female carriers had a resting QTc value in the normal‐to‐borderline range. The 4‐minute recovery QTc demonstrated the best predictive value for carrier status in both sexes, with better LQTS ascertainment in female patients (area under the curve, 0.90 versus 0.82), with greater sensitivity and specificity. The optimal cutoff value for the 4‐minute recovery period was 440 milliseconds for male patients and 450 milliseconds for female patients. The 1‐minute recovery QTc had the best predictive value in female patients for differentiating LQTS1 versus LQTS2 (area under the curve, 0.82), and the peak exercise QTc had a marginally better predictive value in male patients for subtype with (area under the curve, 0.71). The optimal cutoff value for the 1‐minute recovery period was 435 milliseconds for male patients and 455 milliseconds for femal patients.

Conclusions

The 3‐step QT exercise algorithm is a valid tool for the diagnosis of LQTS in a general population with more frequent ambiguity in phenotype. The algorithm is a simple and reliable method for the identification and prediction of the 2 major genotypes of LQTS.

Congenital Long QT Syndrome

Congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) encompasses a group of heritable conditions that are associated with cardiac repolarization dysfunction. Since its initial description in 1957, our understanding of LQTS has increased dramatically. The prevalence of LQTS is estimated to be ∼1:2,000, with a slight female predominance. The diagnosis of LQTS is based on clinical, electrocardiogram, and genetic factors. Risk stratification of patients with LQTS aims to identify those who are at increased risk of cardiac arrest or sudden cardiac death. Factors including age, sex, QTc interval, and genetic background all contribute to current risk stratification paradigms. The management of LQTS involves conservative measures such as the avoidance of QT-prolonging drugs, pharmacologic measures with nonselective β-blockers, and interventional approaches such as device therapy or left cardiac sympathetic denervation. In general, most forms of exercise are considered safe in adequately treated patients, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy is reserved for those at the highest risk. This review summarizes our current understanding of LQTS and provides clinicians with a practical approach to diagnosis and management.

OUP accepted manuscript

Aims

Genetic testing is recommended in specific inherited heart diseases but its role remains unclear and it is not currently recommended in unexplained cardiac arrest (UCA). We sought to assess the yield and clinical utility of genetic testing in UCA using whole-exome sequencing (WES).

Methods and results

Survivors of UCA requiring external defibrillation were included from the Cardiac Arrest Survivor with Preserved Ejection fraction Registry. Whole-exome sequencing was performed, followed by assessment of rare variants in previously reported cardiovascular disease genes. A total of 228 UCA survivors (mean age at arrest 39 ± 13 years) were included. The majority were males (66%) and of European ancestry (81%). Following advanced clinical testing at baseline, the likely aetiology of cardiac arrest was determined in 21/228 (9%) cases. Whole-exome sequencing identified a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant in 23/228 (10%) of UCA survivors overall, increasing the proportion of ‘explained’ cases from 9% only following phenotyping to 18% when combining phenotyping with WES. Notably, 13 (57%) of the 23 P/LP variants identified were located in genes associated with cardiomyopathy, in the absence of a diagnosis of cardiomyopathy at the time of arrest.

Conclusions

Genetic testing identifies a disease-causing variant in 10% of apparent UCA survivors. The majority of disease-causing variants was located in cardiomyopathy-associated genes, highlighting the arrhythmogenic potential of such variants in the absence of an overt cardiomyopathy diagnosis. The present study supports the use of genetic testing including assessment of arrhythmia and cardiomyopathy genes in survivors of UCA.

Return of Results Policies for Genomic Research: Current Practices & The Hearts in Rhythm Organization Approach

Research teams developing biobanks and/or genomic databases must develop policies for the disclosure and reporting of potentially actionable genomic results to research participants. Currently, a broad range of approaches to the return of results exist, with some studies opting for non-disclosure of research results while others follow clinical guidelines for the return of potentially actionable findings from sequencing. In this review, we describe current practices and highlight decisions a research team must make when designing a return of results policy, from informed consent to disclosure practices and clinical validation options. The unique challenges of returning incidental findings in cardiac genes, including reduced penetrance and the lack of clinical screening standards for phenotype-negative individuals are discussed. Lastly, the National Hearts in Rhythm Organization (HiRO) Registry approach is described to provide a rationale for the selective return of field-specific variants to those participating in disease-specific research. Our goal is to provide researchers with a resource when developing a return of results policy tailored for their research program, based on unique factors related to study design, research team composition and availability of clinical resources.

Process of Care and a Practical Toolkit for Evaluating and Managing Arrhythmic Risk in the Cardiogenetic Pregnant Patient

Patients with inherited arrhythmia syndromes (IASs) and inherited cardiomyopathies (ICs) are periodically encountered in both general and specialist practices. These syndromes include long QT syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, Brugada syndrome, early repolarisation syndrome, and hypertrophic and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathies. In general, the presence of an IAS or IC is not a contraindication to pregnancy, but does require additional expertise and patient engagement. In this review, we summarise the various pregnancy-related considerations in patients with IAS and IC, including the impact of physiologic/hemodynamic changes on heart failure progression or arrhythmia propensity, maternal and fetal pregnancy risk stratification, prenatal genetic testing, and the specialised care and monitoring required through pregnancy, labour, and delivery and into the postpartum period. Management of patients with IASs and IC during pregnancy and the postpartum period requires collaboration between patient and provider, with a shared understanding of the general safety and potential risks during the pregnancy and postpartum periods. Patients should be aware of the safety of various medications throughout pregnancy, and those with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators should be managed according to device guidelines. A peripartum care and delivery plan should be established, with multidisciplinary input from various specialists including obstetrics, cardiac obstetrics, and inherited arrhythmia specialists wherever appropriate.