Unknown

Dataset Information

0

A survey of current practices for genomic sequencing test interpretation and reporting processes in US laboratories.


ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:While the diagnostic success of genomic sequencing expands, the complexity of this testing should not be overlooked. Numerous laboratory processes are required to support the identification, interpretation, and reporting of clinically significant variants. This study aimed to examine the workflow and reporting procedures among US laboratories to highlight shared practices and identify areas in need of standardization. METHODS:Surveys and follow-up interviews were conducted with laboratories offering exome and/or genome sequencing to support a research program or for routine clinical services. The 73-item survey elicited multiple choice and free-text responses that were later clarified with phone interviews. RESULTS:Twenty-one laboratories participated. Practices highly concordant across all groups included consent documentation, multiperson case review, and enabling patient opt-out of incidental or secondary findings analysis. Noted divergence included use of phenotypic data to inform case analysis and interpretation and reporting of case-specific quality metrics and methods. Few laboratory policies detailed procedures for data reanalysis, data sharing, or patient access to data. CONCLUSION:This study provides an overview of practices and policies of experienced exome and genome sequencing laboratories. The results enable broader consideration of which practices are becoming standard approaches, where divergence remains, and areas of development in best practice guidelines that may be helpful.Genet Med advance online publication 03 Novemeber 2016.

SUBMITTER: O'Daniel JM 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5415437 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

A survey of current practices for genomic sequencing test interpretation and reporting processes in US laboratories.

O'Daniel Julianne M JM   McLaughlin Heather M HM   Amendola Laura M LM   Bale Sherri J SJ   Berg Jonathan S JS   Bick David D   Bowling Kevin M KM   Chao Elizabeth C EC   Chung Wendy K WK   Conlin Laura K LK   Cooper Gregory M GM   Das Soma S   Deignan Joshua L JL   Dorschner Michael O MO   Evans James P JP   Ghazani Arezou A AA   Goddard Katrina A KA   Gornick Michele M   Farwell Hagman Kelly D KD   Hambuch Tina T   Hegde Madhuri M   Hindorff Lucia A LA   Holm Ingrid A IA   Jarvik Gail P GP   Knight Johnson Amy A   Mighion Lindsey L   Morra Massimo M   Plon Sharon E SE   Punj Sumit S   Richards C Sue CS   Santani Avni A   Shirts Brian H BH   Spinner Nancy B NB   Tang Sha S   Weck Karen E KE   Wolf Susan M SM   Yang Yaping Y   Rehm Heidi L HL  

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 20161103 5


<h4>Purpose</h4>While the diagnostic success of genomic sequencing expands, the complexity of this testing should not be overlooked. Numerous laboratory processes are required to support the identification, interpretation, and reporting of clinically significant variants. This study aimed to examine the workflow and reporting procedures among US laboratories to highlight shared practices and identify areas in need of standardization.<h4>Methods</h4>Surveys and follow-up interviews were conducted  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC3476716 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3149080 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC2731034 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5821595 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5045838 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC5333513 | biostudies-literature