Participant choices for return of genomic results in the eMERGE Network - PubMed

Participant choices for return of genomic results in the eMERGE Network - PubMed

Participant choices for return of genomic results in the eMERGE Network

Christin Hoell 1, Julia Wynn 2, Luke V Rasmussen 1, Keith Marsolo 3, Sharon A Aufox 1, Wendy K Chung 2, John J Connolly 4, Robert R Freimuth 5, David Kochan 6, Hakon Hakonarson 4 7, Margaret Harr 4, Ingrid A Holm 8 9, Iftikhar J Kullo 6, Philip E Lammers 10, Kathleen A Leppig 11, Nancy D Leslie 12, Melanie F Myers 12, Richard R Sharp 13, Maureen E Smith 1, Cynthia A Prows 14

Affiliations 

• PMID: 32669677
 
• DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0905-3

Abstract

Purpose: Secondary findings are typically offered in an all or none fashion when sequencing is used for clinical purposes. This study aims to describe the process of offering categorical and granular choices for results in a large research consortium.

Methods: Within the third phase of the electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics (eMERGE) Network, several sites implemented studies that allowed participants to choose the type of results they wanted to receive from a multigene sequencing panel. Sites were surveyed to capture the details of the implementation protocols and results of these choices.

Results: Across the ten eMERGE sites, 4664 participants including adolescents and adults were offered some type of choice. Categories of choices offered and methods for selecting categories varied. Most participants (94.5%) chose to learn all genetic results, while 5.5% chose subsets of results. Several sites allowed participants to change their choices at various time points, and 0.5% of participants made changes.

Conclusion: Offering choices that include learning some results is important and should be a dynamic process to allow for changes in scientific knowledge, participant age group, and individual preference.

Keywords: disclosure; genetic research results; genetic testing; preferences; secondary findings.

Similar articles

• Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between.

  Jarvik GP, Amendola LM, Berg JS, Brothers K, Clayton EW, Chung W, Evans BJ, Evans JP, Fullerton SM, Gallego CJ, Garrison NA, Gray SW, Holm IA, Kullo IJ, Lehmann LS, McCarty C, Prows CA, Rehm HL, Sharp RR, Salama J, Sanderson S, Van Driest SL, Williams MS, Wolf SM, Wolf WA; eMERGE Act-ROR Committee and CERC Committee; CSER Act-ROR Working Group, Burke W.Am J Hum Genet. 2014 Jun 5;94(6):818-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.04.009. Epub 2014 May 8.PMID: 24814192 Free PMC article.
• Adolescents' and Parents' Genomic Testing Decisions: Associations With Age, Race, and Sex.

  Myers MF, Martin LJ, Prows CA.J Adolesc Health. 2020 Mar;66(3):288-295. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.08.028. Epub 2019 Nov 1.PMID: 31685375
• Research Participants' Preferences for Hypothetical Secondary Results from Genomic Research.

  Wynn J, Martinez J, Duong J, Chiuzan C, Phelan JC, Fyer A, Klitzman RL, Appelbaum PS, Chung WK.J Genet Couns. 2017 Aug;26(4):841-851. doi: 10.1007/s10897-016-0059-2. Epub 2016 Dec 29.PMID: 28035592
• The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network: past, present, and future.

  Gottesman O, Kuivaniemi H, Tromp G, Faucett WA, Li R, Manolio TA, Sanderson SC, Kannry J, Zinberg R, Basford MA, Brilliant M, Carey DJ, Chisholm RL, Chute CG, Connolly JJ, Crosslin D, Denny JC, Gallego CJ, Haines JL, Hakonarson H, Harley J, Jarvik GP, Kohane I, Kullo IJ, Larson EB, McCarty C, Ritchie MD, Roden DM, Smith ME, Böttinger EP, Williams MS; eMERGE Network.Version 2. Genet Med. 2013 Oct;15(10):761-71. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.72. Epub 2013 Jun 6.PMID: 23743551 Free PMC article. Review.
• Processes and preliminary outputs for identification of actionable genes as incidental findings in genomic sequence data in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium.

  Berg JS, Amendola LM, Eng C, Van Allen E, Gray SW, Wagle N, Rehm HL, DeChene ET, Dulik MC, Hisama FM, Burke W, Spinner NB, Garraway L, Green RC, Plon S, Evans JP, Jarvik GP; Members of the CSER Actionability and Return of Results Working Group.Genet Med. 2013 Nov;15(11):860-7. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.133. Epub 2013 Oct 24.PMID: 24195999 Free PMC article. Review.