The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network is a National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)-funded consortium engaged in the development of methods and best-practices for utilizing the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) as a tool for genomic research. Now in its sixth year, its second funding cycle and comprising nine research groups and a coordinating center, the network has played a major role in validating the concept that clinical data derived from EMRs can be used successfully for genomic research. Current work is advancing knowledge in multiple disciplines at the intersection of genomics and healthcare informatics, particularly electronic phenotyping, genome-wide association studies, genomic medicine implementation and the ethical and regulatory issues associated with genomics research and returning results to study participants. Here we describe the evolution, accomplishments, opportunities and challenges of the network since its inception as a five-group consortium focused on genotype-phenotype associations for genomic discovery to its current form as a nine-group consortium pivoting towards implementation of genomic medicine.
The incorporation of genomics into medicine is stimulating interest on the return of incidental findings (IFs) from exome and genome sequencing. However, no large-scale study has yet estimated the number of expected actionable findings per individual; therefore, we classified actionable pathogenic single-nucleotide variants in 500 European- and 500 African-descent participants randomly selected from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Exome Sequencing Project. The 1,000 individuals were screened for variants in 114 genes selected by an expert panel for their association with medically actionable genetic conditions possibly undiagnosed in adults. Among the 1,000 participants, 585 instances of 239 unique variants were identified as disease causing in the Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD). The primary literature supporting the variants' pathogenicity was reviewed. Of the identified IFs, only 16 unique autosomal-dominant variants in 17 individuals were assessed to be pathogenic or likely pathogenic, and one participant had two pathogenic variants for an autosomal-recessive disease. Furthermore, one pathogenic and four likely pathogenic variants not listed as disease causing in HGMD were identified. These data can provide an estimate of the frequency (∼3.4% for European descent and ∼1.2% for African descent) of the high-penetrance actionable pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in adults. The 23 participants with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were disproportionately of European (17) versus African (6) descent. The process of classifying these variants underscores the need for a more comprehensive and diverse centralized resource to provide curated information on pathogenicity for clinical use to minimize health disparities in genomic medicine.
As more research studies incorporate next-generation sequencing (including whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing), investigators and institutional review boards face difficult questions regarding which genomic results to return to research participants and how. An American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics 2013 policy paper suggesting that pathogenic mutations in 56 specified genes should be returned in the clinical setting has raised the question of whether comparable recommendations should be considered in research settings. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium and the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network are multisite research programs that aim to develop practical strategies for addressing questions concerning the return of results in genomic research. CSER and eMERGE committees have identified areas of consensus regarding the return of genomic results to research participants. In most circumstances, if results meet an actionability threshold for return and the research participant has consented to return, genomic results, along with referral for appropriate clinical follow-up, should be offered to participants. However, participants have a right to decline the receipt of genomic results, even when doing so might be viewed as a threat to the participants' health. Research investigators should be prepared to return research results and incidental findings discovered in the course of their research and meeting an actionability threshold, but they have no ethical obligation to actively search for such results. These positions are consistent with the recognition that clinical research is distinct from medical care in both its aims and its guiding moral principles.
Recommendations for laboratories to report incidental findings from genomic tests have stimulated interest in such results. In order to investigate the criteria and processes for assigning the pathogenicity of specific variants and to estimate the frequency of such incidental findings in patients of European and African ancestry, we classified potentially actionable pathogenic single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) in all 4300 European- and 2203 African-ancestry participants sequenced by the NHLBI Exome Sequencing Project (ESP). We considered 112 gene-disease pairs selected by an expert panel as associated with medically actionable genetic disorders that may be undiagnosed in adults. The resulting classifications were compared to classifications from other clinical and research genetic testing laboratories, as well as with in silico pathogenicity scores. Among European-ancestry participants, 30 of 4300 (0.7%) had a pathogenic SNV and six (0.1%) had a disruptive variant that was expected to be pathogenic, whereas 52 (1.2%) had likely pathogenic SNVs. For African-ancestry participants, six of 2203 (0.3%) had a pathogenic SNV and six (0.3%) had an expected pathogenic disruptive variant, whereas 13 (0.6%) had likely pathogenic SNVs. Genomic Evolutionary Rate Profiling mammalian conservation score and the Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion summary score of conservation, substitution, regulation, and other evidence were compared across pathogenicity assignments and appear to have utility in variant classification. This work provides a refined estimate of the burden of adult onset, medically actionable incidental findings expected from exome sequencing, highlights challenges in variant classification, and demonstrates the need for a better curated variant interpretation knowledge base.
We describe here the design and initial implementation of the eMERGE-PGx project. eMERGE-PGx, a partnership of the eMERGE and PGRN consortia, has three objectives : 1) Deploy PGRNseq, a next-generation sequencing platform assessing sequence variation in 84 proposed pharmacogenes, in nearly 9,000 patients likely to be prescribed drugs of interest in a 1–3 year timeframe across several clinical sites; 2) Integrate well-established clinically-validated pharmacogenetic genotypes into the electronic health record with associated clinical decision support and assess process and clinical outcomes of implementation; and 3) Develop a repository of pharmacogenetic variants of unknown significance linked to a repository of EHR-based clinical phenotype data for ongoing pharmacogenomics discovery. We describe site-specific project implementation and anticipated products, including genetic variant and phenotype data repositories, novel variant association studies, clinical decision support modules, clinical and process outcomes, approaches to manage incidental findings, and patient and clinician education methods.
Purpose To evaluate the cost effectiveness of next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer and polyposis (CRCP) syndromes in patients referred to cancer genetics clinics. Patients and Methods We developed a decision model to evaluate NGS panel testing compared with current standard of care in patients referred to a cancer genetics clinic. We obtained data on the prevalence of genetic variants from a large academic laboratory and calculated the costs and health benefits of identifying relatives with a pathogenic variant, in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We classified the CRCP syndromes according to their type of inheritance and penetrance of colorectal cancer. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty. Results Evaluation with an NGS panel that included Lynch syndrome genes and other genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes led to an average increase of 0.151 year of life, 0.128 QALY, and $4,650 per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $36,500 per QALY compared with standard care and a 99% probability that this panel was cost effective at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY. When compared with this panel, the addition of genes with low colorectal cancer penetrance resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $77,300 per QALY. Conclusion The use of an NGS panel that includes genes associated with highly penetrant CRCP syndromes in addition to Lynch syndrome genes as a first-line test is likely to provide meaningful clinical benefits in a cost-effective manner at a $100,000 per QALY threshold.
Genetic variation can affect drug response in multiple ways, though it remains unclear how rare genetic variants affect drug response. The electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network, collaborating with the Pharmacogenomics Research Network, began eMERGE-PGx, a targeted sequencing study to assess genetic variation in 82 pharmacogenes critical for implementation of “precision medicine.” The February 2015 eMERGE-PGx data release includes sequence-derived data from ~5000 clinical subjects. We present the variant frequency spectrum categorized by variant type, ancestry, and predicted function. We found 95.12% of genes have variants with a scaled CADD score above 20, and 96.19% of all samples had one or more Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Level A actionable variants. These data highlight the distribution and scope of genetic variation in relevant pharmacogenes, identifying challenges associated with implementing clinical sequencing for drug treatment at a broader level, underscoring the importance for multifaceted research in the execution of precision medicine.
Purpose Te American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended that clinical laboratories performing next-generation sequencing analyze and return pathogenic variants for 56 specific genes it considered medically actionable. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of returning these results. Methods We developed a decision-analytic policy model to project the quality-adjusted life-years and lifetime costs associated with returning ACMG-recommended incidental findings in three hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 patients. Results Returning incidental findings to cardiomyopathy patients, colorectal cancer patients, or healthy individuals would increase costs by $896,000, $2.9 million, and $3.9 million, respectively, and would increase quality-adjusted life-years by 20, 25.4, and 67 years, respectively, for incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $44,800, $115,020, and $58,600, respectively. In probabilistic analyses, returning incidental findings cost less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained in 85, 28, and 91%, respectively, of simulations. Assuming next-generation sequencing costs $500, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for primary screening of healthy individuals was $133,400 (<$100,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained in 10% of simulations). Results were sensitive to the cohort age and assumptions about gene penetrance. Conclusion Returning incidental findings is likely cost-effective for certain patient populations. Screening of generally healthy individuals is likely not cost-effective based on current data, unless next-generation sequencing costs less than $500.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.