Toward clinical genomics in everyday medicine: perspectives and recommendations

References

• What Is Genetic Testing? Genetics Home Reference. Bethesda (MD): NIH/U.S. National Library of Medicine 2016. [cited 2016 Jan 16]. Available from: http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/testing/genetictesting
   Google Scholar
• Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Eng J Med. 2014;371(12):1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prada CE, Gonzaga-Jauregui C, Tannenbaum R, et al. Clinical utility of whole-exome sequencing in rare diseases: galactosialidosis. Eur J Med Genet. 2014;57(7):339–344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsurusaki Y, Kobayashi Y, Hisano M, et al. The diagnostic utility of exome sequencing in Joubert syndrome and related disorders. J of Hum Genet. 2013;58(2):113–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyle A, Smertenko T, Bargiela D, et al. Exome sequencing in undiagnosed inherited and sporadic ataxias. Brain. 2015;138(2):276–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacik P, Guthrie KJ, Strongosky AJ, et al. Whole-exome sequencing as a diagnostic tool in a family with episodic ataxia type 1. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(3):366–371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Futema M, Plagnol V, Whittall RA, et al. Use of targeted exome sequencing as a diagnostic tool for familial hypercholesterolaemia. J Med Genet. 2012;49(10):644–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon-Salazar TJ, Silhavy JL, Udpa N, et al. Exome sequencing can improve diagnosis and alter patient management. Sci Trans Med. 2012;4(138):138ra178–138ra178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesecker LG, Biesecker BB. An approach to pediatric exome and genome sequencing. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2014;26(6):639–645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FDA. The public health evidence for FDA oversight of laboratory developed tests: 20 case studies. Silver Spring (MD): FDA; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• The Complex Effects of the FDA’s Proposal to Regulate Laboratory-Developed Tests. Sachs R. HealthAffairs Blog 2015. [Last accessed 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2015/04/10/the-complex-effects-of-the-fdas-proposal-to-regulate-laboratory-developed-tests/.
   Google Scholar
• Is Lab Testing the ‘Wild West’ of Medicine? Burton TM. Wall Street Journal 2015. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.wsj.com/articles/is-lab-testing-the-wild-west-of-medicine-1449800707.
   Google Scholar
• Evans JP, Watson MS. Genetic testing and FDA regulation: overregulation threatens the emergence of genomic medicine. JAMA. 2015;313(7):669.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans BJ, Burke W, Jarvik GP. The FDA and genomic tests–getting regulation right. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(23):2258–2264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heger M. CAP publishes accreditation checklist for NGS in clinical labs [Internet]. GenomeWeb. 2012 [cited 2016 Jan 8]. Available from: https://www.genomeweb.com/sequencing/cap-publishes-accreditation-checklist-ngs-clinical-labs)
   Google Scholar
• Aziz N, Zhao Q, Bry L, et al. College of American Pathologists’ laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015;139(4):481–493.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Division of Advertising Practices. Washington, DC: FTC/Bureau of Consumer Protection 2016. Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection/our-divisions/division-advertising-practices [Last accessed 14 January 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Lerman C, Narod S, Schulman K, et al. BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes. JAMA. 1996;275(24):1885–1892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Wang M. Personalized medicine in oncology: tailoring the right drug to the right patient. Biomark Med. 2010;4(4):523–533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma M. Personalized medicine and cancer. J Personalized Med. 2012;2(1):1–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walko CM, McLeod H. Use of CYP2D6 genotyping in practice: tamoxifen dose adjustment. Pharmacogenomics. 2012;13(6):691–697.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vijayaraghavan A, Efrusy MB, Göke B, et al. Cost-effectiveness of KRAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer patients in the United States and Germany. Int J Cancer. 2012;131(2):438–445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weng L, Zhang L, Peng Y, et al. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics: a bridge to individualized cancer therapy. Pharmacogenomics. 2013;14(3):315–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gagan J, Van Allen EM. Next-generation sequencing to guide cancer therapy. Genome Med. 2015;7(1):80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tripathy D, Harnden K, Blackwell K, et al. Next generation sequencing and tumor mutation profiling: are we ready for routine use in the oncology clinic? BMC Med. 2014;12:140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson DB, Dahlman KH, Knol J, et al. Enabling a genetically informed approach to cancer medicine: a retrospective evaluation of the impact of comprehensive tumor profiling using a targeted next-generation sequencing panel. The Oncologist. 2014;19(6):616–622.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Illumina to Support ‘Companion Therapeutics’ in Oncology. Bio-IT World. Needham, MA 2014. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.bio-itworld.com/2014/8/21/illumina-support-companion-therapeutics-oncology.html.
   Google Scholar
• Carmichael N, Tsipis J, Windmueller G, et al. “Is it going to hurt?”: the impact of the diagnostic odyssey on children and their families. J Genet Couns. 2015;24(2):325–335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Clinical utility of genetic and genomic services: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2015;17(6):505–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2418–2425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green RC, Rehm HL, Kohane IS. Clinical genome sequencing. In: Ginsburg GS, Willard HF, editors. Genomic and personalized medicine. San Diego (CA): Academic Press; 2013. p. 102–122.
   Google Scholar
• Genomic Medicine Activities. NIH/NHGRI/Division of Genomic Medicine. Bethesda, MD 2015. [Last accessed 2016 Feb 14]. Available from: http://www.genome.gov/27549225.
   Google Scholar
• Current Research Programs. NIH/NHGRI/Division of Genomic. Bethesda, MD 2015. [cited 2016 Feb 14]. Available from: http://www.genome.gov/27551170.
   Google Scholar
• Collins FS, Varmus H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(9):793–795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell KP, Cogswell WA, Christianson CA, et al. Primary care physicians’ awareness, experience and opinions of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. J Genet Couns. 2012;21(1):113–126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vassy JL, Korf BR, Green RC. How to know when physicians are ready for genomic medicine. Sci Trans Med. 2015;7(287):287fs19–287fs19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACT Sheets and Confirmatory Algorithms. American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Bethesda, MD, 2016. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.acmg.net/ACMG/Publications/ACT_Sheets_and_Confirmatory_Algorithms/ACMG/Publications/ACT_Sheets_and_Confirmatory_Algorithms/ACT_sheets_Homepage.aspx?hkey=6d43e3d3-71fd-49f4-88d5-7197238f9f33.
   Google Scholar
• Paving the way for personalized medicine. FDA. Silver Spring, MD, 2013. [cited 2015 Dec]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/PersonalizedMedicine/UCM372421.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Collins FS, Hamburg MA. First FDA authorization for next-generation sequencer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(25):2369–2371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Classification of devices intended for human use (c). United States Code, 2006 Edition, Supplement 4, Title 21 – Food and Drugs. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2010-title21/USCODE-2010-title21-chap9-subchapV-partA-sec360c/content-detail.html.
   Google Scholar
• Javitt GH, Carner KS. Regulation of next generation sequencing. J Law Med Ethics. 2014;42 Suppl 1:9–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hresko A, Haga SB. Insurance coverage policies for personalized medicine. J Pers Med. 2012;2(4):201–216.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tunis SR, Pearson SD. Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare’s ‘coverage with evidence development’. Health Aff. 2006;25(5):1218–1230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khoury M, Berg A, Coates R, et al. The evidence dilemma in genomic medicine. Health Aff. 2008;27(6):1600–1611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mei Li C, Risebrough, Nancy, Hux Marg Coverage with evidence development activities around the world: an environment scan. ISPOR 17th Annual European Congress. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014
   Google Scholar
• Medicare’s Reset on ‘Coverage With Evidence Development. Neumann PJ, Chambers J. HealthAffairs Blog. 2013; [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2013/04/01/medicares-reset-on-coverage-with-evidence-development/.
   Google Scholar
• Coverage with Evidence Development. Guidance for the Public, Industry. CMS/Medicare. Baltimore, MD. 2014. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coverage/Coverage-with-Evidence-Development/.
   Google Scholar
• Reimbursment models to promote evidence generation and innovation for genomic tests. NIH. Bethesda (MD). 2012; [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.genome.gov/27552210.
   Google Scholar
• Self-insured Group Health Plans: questions and answers. Self-Insurance Institute of America. Washington, DC. 2015. [cited 2016 Jan 14]. Available from: http://www.siia.org/i4a/pages/Index.cfm?pageID=4546.
   Google Scholar
• Employer Health Benefits 2014 Annual Survey. Claxton G, Rae M, Panchal N et al. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust. Menlo Park (CA). 2014; [cited 14 January 2016]. Available from: https://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/8225.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Henrikson NB, Bowen D, Burke W. Does genomic risk information motivate people to change their behavior? Genome Med. 2009;1(4):37–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloss CS, Madlensky L, Schork NJ, et al. Genomic information as a behavioral health intervention: can it work? Per Med. 2011;8(6):659–667.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webster TH, Beal SJ, Brother KB. Motivation in the age of genomics: why genetic findings of disease susceptibility might not motivate behavior change. Life Sciences, Society Policy. 2013;9:8.
   Google Scholar
• Diseati L, Scheinfeldt LB, Kasper RS, et al. Common genetic risk for melanoma encourages preventive behavior change. J Pers Med. 2015;5(1):36–49.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bard JS. When public health and genetic privacy collide: positive and normative theories explaining how ACA’s expansion of corporate wellness programs conflicts with GINA’s privacy rules. J Law Med Ethics. 2011;39:469–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green RC, Lautenbach D, McGuire AL. GINA, genetic discrimination, and genomic medicine. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(5):397–399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rehm HL, Berg JS, Brooks LD, et al. ClinGen – the clinical genome resource. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(23):2235–2242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health. Ontario, Canada 2015. [cited 2016 Jan 16]. Available from: https://genomicsandhealth.org/
   Google Scholar
• Erlich Y, Williams JB, Glazer D, et al. Redefining genomic privacy: trust and empowerment. Plos Biology. 2014;12(11):e1001983.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gymrek M, McGuire AL, Golan D, et al. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science. 2013;339(6117):321–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erlich Y, Narayanan A. Routes for breaching and protecting genetic privacy. Nat Rev Genet. 2014;15(6):409–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frederick R. Core concept: homomorphic encryption. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112(28):8515–8516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haga SB, Carrig MM, O’Daniel JM, et al. Genomic risk profiling: attitudes and use in personal and clinical care of primary care physicians who offer risk profiling. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(8):834–840.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manolio TA, Chisholm RL, Ozenberger B, et al. Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here. Genet Med. 2013;15(4):258–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demmer LA, Waggoner DJ. Professional medical education and genomics. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2014;15:507–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharp RR, Goldlust ME, Eng C. Addressing gaps in physician education using personal genomic testing. Genet Med. 2011;13(8):750–751.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ormond KE, Hudgins L, Ladd JM, et al. Medical and graduate students’ attitudes toward personal genomics. Genet Med. 2011;13(5):400–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salari K, Karczewski KJ, Hudgins L, et al. Evidence that personal genome testing enhances student learning in a course on genomics and personalized medicine. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e68853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanderson SC, Linderman MD, Kasarskis A, et al. Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: a longitudinal cohort study. Genome Med. 2013;5(12):113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walt DR, Kuhlik A, Epstein SK, et al. Lessons learned from the introduction of personalized genotyping into a medical school curriculum. Genet Med. 2011;13(1):63–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consumer Survey on Patient Engagement: United States Research Recap. Accenture. Chicago, IL. 2013. [cited 2016 Jan 15]. Available from: https://www.accenture.com/t20150708T033734__w__/us-en/_acnmedia/Accenture/Conversion-Assets/DotCom/Documents/Global/PDF/Industries_11/Accenture-Consumer-Patient-Engagement-Survey-US-Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Topol EJ. The creative destruction of medicine: how the digital revolution will create better health care. Basic books. New York (NY): A Member of the Perseus Books Group; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Patient Engagement: the Holy Grail of Meaningful Use. peer60/Patient Portals. American Fork, UT. 2014; [cited 2016 Jan 15]. Available from: http://research.peer60.com/patient-portals/
   Google Scholar
• Wachter R. The digital doctor: hope, hype, and harm at the dawn of medicine’s computer age. Boston (MA): McGraw-Hill Education; 2015.
   Google Scholar