Cargando…

Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies

PURPOSE: As whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) move into routine clinical practice, it is timely to review data that might inform the debate regarding secondary findings (SF) and the development of policies that maximize participant benefit. METHODS: We systematically sea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mackley, Michael P., Fletcher, Benjamin, Parker, Michael, Watkins, Hugh, Ormondroyd, Elizabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447864/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27584911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.109
_version_ 1783239437105233920
author Mackley, Michael P.
Fletcher, Benjamin
Parker, Michael
Watkins, Hugh
Ormondroyd, Elizabeth
author_facet Mackley, Michael P.
Fletcher, Benjamin
Parker, Michael
Watkins, Hugh
Ormondroyd, Elizabeth
author_sort Mackley, Michael P.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: As whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) move into routine clinical practice, it is timely to review data that might inform the debate regarding secondary findings (SF) and the development of policies that maximize participant benefit. METHODS: We systematically searched for qualitative and quantitative studies that explored stakeholder views on SF in WES/WGS. Framework analysis was undertaken to identify major themes. RESULTS: Forty-four articles reporting the views of 11,566 stakeholders were included. Stakeholders were broadly supportive of returning “actionable” findings, but definitions of actionability varied. Stakeholder views on SF disclosure exist along a spectrum: potential WES/WGS recipients' views were largely influenced by a sense of rights, whereas views of genomics professionals were informed by a sense of professional responsibility. Experience with genetic illness and testing resulted in greater caution about SF, suggesting that truly informed decisions require an understanding of the implications and limitations of WES/WGS and possible findings. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that bidirectional interaction during consent might best facilitate informed decision making about SF and that dynamic forms of consent, allowing for changing preferences, should be considered. Research exploring views from wider perspectives and from recipients who have received SF is critical if evidence-based policies are to be achieved. Genet Med 19 3, 283–293.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5447864
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54478642017-06-05 Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies Mackley, Michael P. Fletcher, Benjamin Parker, Michael Watkins, Hugh Ormondroyd, Elizabeth Genet Med Systematic Review PURPOSE: As whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) move into routine clinical practice, it is timely to review data that might inform the debate regarding secondary findings (SF) and the development of policies that maximize participant benefit. METHODS: We systematically searched for qualitative and quantitative studies that explored stakeholder views on SF in WES/WGS. Framework analysis was undertaken to identify major themes. RESULTS: Forty-four articles reporting the views of 11,566 stakeholders were included. Stakeholders were broadly supportive of returning “actionable” findings, but definitions of actionability varied. Stakeholder views on SF disclosure exist along a spectrum: potential WES/WGS recipients' views were largely influenced by a sense of rights, whereas views of genomics professionals were informed by a sense of professional responsibility. Experience with genetic illness and testing resulted in greater caution about SF, suggesting that truly informed decisions require an understanding of the implications and limitations of WES/WGS and possible findings. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that bidirectional interaction during consent might best facilitate informed decision making about SF and that dynamic forms of consent, allowing for changing preferences, should be considered. Research exploring views from wider perspectives and from recipients who have received SF is critical if evidence-based policies are to be achieved. Genet Med 19 3, 283–293. Nature Publishing Group 2017-03 2016-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5447864/ /pubmed/27584911 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.109 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Mackley, Michael P.
Fletcher, Benjamin
Parker, Michael
Watkins, Hugh
Ormondroyd, Elizabeth
Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title_full Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title_fullStr Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title_full_unstemmed Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title_short Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
title_sort stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5447864/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27584911
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.109
work_keys_str_mv AT mackleymichaelp stakeholderviewsonsecondaryfindingsinwholegenomeandwholeexomesequencingasystematicreviewofquantitativeandqualitativestudies
AT fletcherbenjamin stakeholderviewsonsecondaryfindingsinwholegenomeandwholeexomesequencingasystematicreviewofquantitativeandqualitativestudies
AT parkermichael stakeholderviewsonsecondaryfindingsinwholegenomeandwholeexomesequencingasystematicreviewofquantitativeandqualitativestudies
AT watkinshugh stakeholderviewsonsecondaryfindingsinwholegenomeandwholeexomesequencingasystematicreviewofquantitativeandqualitativestudies
AT ormondroydelizabeth stakeholderviewsonsecondaryfindingsinwholegenomeandwholeexomesequencingasystematicreviewofquantitativeandqualitativestudies