Biomedical subjects

Chloe Mighton

Publications and source records attributed to Chloe Mighton.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2025

Opportunistic screening for broad range of medically relevant secondary findings: Laboratory benefits and burdens.

PURPOSE: Exome and genome sequencing enable opportunistic screening for secondary findings (SFs). We report on exome analysis for a broad range of medically relevant SFs in the setting of the Incidental Genomics randomized clinical trial (NCT03597165). METHODS: Participants had exome sequencing and were randomized to receive only primary cancer findings (control) or cancer findings and a choice of SFs (intervention). RESULTS: Across 279 participants, there were 4441 unique variants in SF genes: 5.0% (221) were reportable pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants, and 81.4% (3615) were nonreportable variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Intervention arm participants had on average 2.6 (SD 1.66, range 0-9) pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants and 29.5 VUS (SD 13.2, range 2-74). SFs for monogenic disease risk were reported in 35.3% (49/139) of participants (American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics non-cancer subset in 1.4%) and carrier status in 89.3% (117/131). In the intervention arm, variant filtration was 7.7 times longer per case (95% CI 5.3 to 11.3, P < .0001), variant classification was 13.3 times longer (95% CI 10.6 to 16.5, P < .0001), and report preparation was 3.3 times longer (95% CI 2.6 to 4.1, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Although the yield of reportable SFs was high, this was accompanied by many nonreportable VUS and increased efforts for exome analysis.

Humans↗

PubMed2024

Offering complex genomic screening in acute pediatric settings: Family decision-making and outcomes.

PURPOSE: Families of children in pediatric acute care who are offered ultrarapid genomic sequencing are making complex decisions during a high-stress period. To reduce complexity for families and clinicians, we offered genomic screening for the child and parents after the completion of diagnostic testing. We evaluated uptake, understanding, and service delivery preferences. METHODS: A cohort of 235 families who had completed ultrarapid diagnostic genomic sequencing at 17 Australian hospitals were offered up to 3 screens on their genomic data: pediatric-onset, adult-onset, and expanded couple carrier screening. We investigated decision making, understanding, and service delivery preferences using surveys at 3 time points (pre counseling, post counseling, and post result) and performed inductive content analysis of pretest genetic counseling transcripts. RESULTS: A total of 119 families (51%) attended genetic counseling with 115 (49%) accepting genomic screening. Survey respondents were more likely to find decisions about couple carrier screening easy (87%) compared with adult (68%; P = .002) or pediatric (71%; P = .01) screening decisions. All respondents with newly detected pathogenic variants accurately recalled this 1 month later. A delayed offer of screening was acceptable to most respondents (78%). CONCLUSION: Separating genomic screening from the stressful diagnostic period is supported by families who demonstrate good knowledge and recall. Our results suggest delaying genomic screening should be trialed more widely.

Humans↗

PubMed2024

Opportunistic genomic screening has clinical utility: An interventional cohort study.

PURPOSE: Practice is shifting toward genome-first approaches, such as opportunistic screening for secondary findings (SFs). Analysis of SFs could be extended beyond medically actionable results to include non-medically actionable monogenic disease risks, carrier status, pharmacogenomic variants, and risk variants for common complex disease. However, evidence on the clinical utility of returning these results is lacking. We assessed the outcomes of opportunistic screening for a broad spectrum of SFs by evaluating the yield, impact on clinical management, and consistency between SFs and participants' clinical features and family history. METHODS: Adult cancer patients had exome sequencing with the option to learn multiple categories of SFs. Outcomes data were collected through chart review and participant-reported measures up to one year after return of results. RESULTS: All participants (n = 139, 85.6% female, average 54.6 years old) who elected to learn SFs had ≥1 variant reported (100% [139/139]). The yield of reportable findings was highest for pharmacogenomic variants (97.8% [135/138] of participants), followed by common disease risk variants (89.4% [118/132]), carrier status (89.3% [117/131]), and variants related to Mendelian (27.2% [34/125]), medically actionable (15.2% [21/138]), and early-onset neurodegenerative (2.6% [3/117]) disease risks. SFs from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics list (v3.2, noncancer genes) were reported in 1.4% (2/138) of participants. SFs across all categories demonstrated clinical utility by prompting management changes in 28.1% (39/139) of participants. Moreover, a considerable proportion of participants had suggestive clinical features (49.0% (24/49)]) or family history (21.8% (27/124)) potentially related to their SFs. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate there are potential benefits from opportunistic screening for a broad range of SFs.

Humans↗