Management of incidental findings in clinical genomic sequencing studies
Management of incidental findings in clinical genomic sequencing studies
Whole-genome approaches, which are replacing targeted tests in research and clinical practice, increase the chances of ‘incidental findings’ (IFs) – that is, those unrelated to the reason for the test. IFs raise several challenging questions, such as are researchers obliged to disclose IFs, and does this change if the researcher is also a clinician? How can the clinical significance of IFs be determined, and what significance level should determine disclosure? Could family members be tested to help to clarify significance, and if so, how? What should happen if adult-onset risks are found in children or prenatally? No consensus currently exists about disclosing IFs from research, or about how participants can be helped to make decisions about and give consent (not) to receive them. We recommend that as more research studies that use genome-wide tests are launched, longitudinal empirical work be conducted to explore participants' experiences and inform best practice for consent and, where relevant, feedback.
1-7
Dheensa, Sandi
d7d7e2bb-8def-4fad-9e1d-33d8141a0c9c
Shkedi-Rafid, Shiri
0f4001fe-e41a-4b33-9afc-67ef298b7172
Crawford, Gillian
c49ec103-2936-4897-8f25-96abe25b3a9f
Bertier, Gabrielle
aaefe2a9-de33-4129-b29c-d1de81c7788d
Schonstein, Lisa
8156e6a2-648f-4b74-bb60-9e9623df5d2c
Lucassen, Anneke
2eb85efc-c6e8-4c3f-b963-0290f6c038a5
15 January 2016
Dheensa, Sandi
d7d7e2bb-8def-4fad-9e1d-33d8141a0c9c
Shkedi-Rafid, Shiri
0f4001fe-e41a-4b33-9afc-67ef298b7172
Crawford, Gillian
c49ec103-2936-4897-8f25-96abe25b3a9f
Bertier, Gabrielle
aaefe2a9-de33-4129-b29c-d1de81c7788d
Schonstein, Lisa
8156e6a2-648f-4b74-bb60-9e9623df5d2c
Lucassen, Anneke
2eb85efc-c6e8-4c3f-b963-0290f6c038a5
Dheensa, Sandi, Shkedi-Rafid, Shiri, Crawford, Gillian, Bertier, Gabrielle, Schonstein, Lisa and Lucassen, Anneke
(2016)
Management of incidental findings in clinical genomic sequencing studies.
eLS, .
(doi:10.1002/9780470015902.a0025838).
Abstract
Whole-genome approaches, which are replacing targeted tests in research and clinical practice, increase the chances of ‘incidental findings’ (IFs) – that is, those unrelated to the reason for the test. IFs raise several challenging questions, such as are researchers obliged to disclose IFs, and does this change if the researcher is also a clinician? How can the clinical significance of IFs be determined, and what significance level should determine disclosure? Could family members be tested to help to clarify significance, and if so, how? What should happen if adult-onset risks are found in children or prenatally? No consensus currently exists about disclosing IFs from research, or about how participants can be helped to make decisions about and give consent (not) to receive them. We recommend that as more research studies that use genome-wide tests are launched, longitudinal empirical work be conducted to explore participants' experiences and inform best practice for consent and, where relevant, feedback.
Text
eLS incidental findings.pdf
- Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Published date: 15 January 2016
Organisations:
Cancer Sciences
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 386092
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/386092
PURE UUID: 3cb37839-ea0a-4add-a993-d50f1c8ea38b
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 28 Jan 2016 12:28
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:11
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Sandi Dheensa
Author:
Shiri Shkedi-Rafid
Author:
Gabrielle Bertier
Author:
Lisa Schonstein
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics