Challenges of detecting secondary findings in genomic medicine in rare diseases: a nation-wide survey of Japanese facilities outsourcing comprehensive genetic testing.

  • Bertoli Avila AM, Beetz C, Amizian N, Rocha ME, Guatepónza B, Pereira C, et al. Successful application of genome sequencing in a diagnostic setting: 1007 indicator cases from a clinically heterogeneous cohort. Eur J Hum Genet. 2021; 29: 141-53.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Ross JP, Dion BA, Rollo JA. Exome sequencing in genetic diseases: recent developments and considerations. F1000 2020; 9: F1000 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.19444.1. Reverend College – 336.

    Article – Commodity
    PubMed
    PubMed Central

    Google Scholar

  • Takahashi Wai, Mizusawa H. Initiative on Rare and Undiagnosed Diseases in Japan. JMA J. 2021; 4: 112-8.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Kalia SS, Adelman K, Bale SJ, Chung WK, Eng C, Evans JP et al. Recommendations for Reporting Secondary Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing, 2016 Update (ACMG SF v2.0): The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Policy Statement. Genet Mead. 2017; 19: 249-55. [published correction appears in Genet Med. 2017;19:484].

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, Kalia SS, Korf BR, Martin CL et al. ACMG recommendations for reporting incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Mead. 2013; 15: 565-74. [published correction appears in Genet Med. 2017;19:606].

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • de Wert G, Dondorp W, Clarke A, Dequeker EMC, Cordier C, Deans Z, et al. Opportunistic genomic screening. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur J Hum Genet. 2021; 29: 365–77.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Van LCG, Cornell MC, Bury B, Hastings RG, Felman F, Hodgson SV, et al. Whole genome sequencing in health care. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur J Hum Genet. 2013; 21: 580-4.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Kou T, Kanai M, Yamamoto Y, Kamada M, Nakatsui M, Sakuma T et al. Clinical sequencing using a next generation sequencing-based multiplex gene assay in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Science. 2017; 108: 1440-6.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Mukai Y, Ueno H. Establishment and implementation of cancer genetic medicine in Japan. Cancer Science. 2021; 112: 970-7.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Tsuchiya M, Yamada T, Akaishi R, Hamanoue H, Hirasawa A, Hyodo M et al. Attitudes toward disclosure of secondary findings from next-generation sequencing and the current situation: a nationwide survey of clinical geneticists in Japan. J Hum Genet. 2020; 65: 1045–53.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Suggestion for information transfer in genomic medicine: comprehensive tumor genetic profiling analysis and comprehensive germline/genome sequencing analysis. [First edition] http://sph.med.kyoto-u.ac.jp/gccrc/pdf/a10_teigen_20180321.pdf (in Japanese).

  • Guidelines for the communication process in genomic medicine. Part 2: Specific principles of comprehensive germline genetic analysis using next generation sequencing [Revised 2nd edition] k103E_guidelines_part2_210908.pdf (kyoto-u.ac.jp).

  • Miller DT, Lee K, Chung WK, Gordon AS, Herman GE, Klein TE et al. ACMG SF v3.0 List for Reporting Secondary Findings in Clinical Exome and Genome Sequencing: An American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) Policy Statement. Genet Mead. 2021; 23: 1381-190. [published correction appears in Genet Med. 2021; 23:1582–4]

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Delanne J, Nambot S, Chassagne A, Putois O, Pelissier A, Peyron C, et al. Secondary results from whole-exome/genome sequencing to assess stakeholder perspectives. A review of the literature. Eur J Med Genet. 2019; 62: 103529.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Richer J, Laberge AM. By-products from Next Generation Sequencing: What Does Childhood Really Mean? Genet Mead. 2019; 21: 124–32.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Welfond PS, Fernandez Biography, Green RC. Uncovering secondary outcomes from pediatric sequencing for families: a consideration of ‘benefit for families’. J Law Med Ethics. 2015; 43:552-8.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Barajas M, Ross LF. Attitudes of pediatric specialists on secondary outcomes in pediatric genetic sequencing. J Pediatr. 2015; 166: 1276-82.e7.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Bernhardt BA, Roche MI, Perry DL, Scollon SR, Tomlinson AN, Skinner D. Experiments with obtaining informed consent for genetic sequencing. Am J Med Genet A.2015; 167A: 2635–46.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Rost C, Dent KM, Botkin J, Rothwell E. Experiences and lessons learned by genetic counselors in returning secondary genetic outcomes to patients. J Genet Couns. 2020; 29: 1234–44.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Smith LA, Douglas J, Braxton AA, Kramer K. Reporting of incidental findings in clinical whole-exome sequencing: incorporating the 2013 ACMG recommendations into current genetic counseling practices. J Genet Couns. 2015; 24: 654-62.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Downing NR, Williams JK, Dack Hirsch S, Dresnack M, Simon SM. Geneticists’ perspectives on the detection of genomic incidental findings in the clinical setting. Patient education advice. 2013; 90: 133-8.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Townsend A, Adam S, Birch BH, Lone Z, Russo F, Friedman JM. ‘I want to know what’s in Pandora’s Box’: Comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in full clinical genetic sequencing. Am J Med Genet A.2012; 158A: 2519-25.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Vornanen M, Aktan-Collan K, Hallowell N, Konttinen H, Kääriäinen H, Haukkala A. “I would like to discuss it further with an expert”: A focus group study of Finnish adult views of genetic secondary outcomes. J Community Genet. 2018; 9: 305-14.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Kawame H, Fukushima A, Fuse N, Nagami F, Suzuki Y, Sakurai-Yageta M et al. Returning individual genomic results to research participants: design and pilot study of the Tohoku Medical Megabank Project. J Hum Genet. 2022; 67: 9-17.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Veenstra DL, Roth JA, Garrison LP Jr, Ramsey SD, Burke W. A formal risk-benefit framework for genetic testing: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice. Genet Mead. 2010; 12:686-93.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Christenhusz GM, Devriendt K, Peeters H, Van Esch H, Dierickx K. Communication with secondary variables: interviews with parents whose children underwent group CGH testing. Clin Genet. 2014; 86: 207-16.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Shimada S, Yamada T, Iwakuma M, Kosugi S. Physicians’ perceptions of factors influencing detection of secondary outcomes in tumor genotyping in Japan: a qualitative study. Eur J Hum Genet. 2022; 30: 88-94.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Wu AC, McMahon P, Lu C. Ending the diagnostic journey–is whole genome sequencing the answer? Gamma Pediatric. 2020; 174: 821-2.

    Article – Commodity

    Google Scholar

  • Leave a Comment