CLIA-tested genetic variants on commercial SNP arrays: potential for incidental findings in genome-wide association studies.

National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute's Framingham Heart Study, Framingham, Massachusetts 01702, USA.
Genetics in medicine: official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics (Impact Factor: 3.92). 06/2010; 12(6):355-63. DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181e1e2a9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Increases in throughput and affordability of genotyping products have led to large sample sizes in genetic studies, increasing the likelihood that incidental genetic findings may occur. We set out to survey potential notifiable variants on arrays used in genome-wide association studies and in direct-to-consumer genetic services.
We used multiple bioinformatics strategies to identify, and map variants tested for genetic disorders in > or = 2 CLIA-approved laboratories (based on the GeneTests database). We subsequently surveyed 18 commercial single nucleotide polymorphism arrays and HapMap for these variants.
Of 1,362 genes tested according to GeneTests, we identified 298 specific targeted mutations measured in more than or equal to two laboratories, encompassing 56 disorders. Only 88 of 298 mutations could be identified as known single nucleotide polymorphisms in genomic databases. We found 18 of 88 single nucleotide polymorphisms present in HapMap or on commercial single nucleotide polymorphism arrays. Homozygotes for rare alleles of some variants were identified in the Framingham Heart Study, an active genome-wide association studies cohort (n = 8,410).
Variants in genes including APOE, F5, HFE, CYP21A2, MEFV, SPINK1, BTD, GALT, and G6PD were found on single nucleotide polymorphism arrays or in the HapMap. Some of these variants may warrant further review to determine their likelihood to trigger incidental findings in the course of genome-wide association studies or direct-to-consumer testing.

  • Journal of the American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 08/2013; · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Single nucleotide polymorphism microarrays have the ability to reveal parental consanguinity which may or may not be known to healthcare providers. Consanguinity can have significant implications for the health of patients and for individual and family psychosocial well-being. These results often present ethical and legal dilemmas that can have important ramifications. Unexpected consanguinity can be confounding to healthcare professionals who may be unprepared to handle these results or to communicate them to families or other appropriate representatives. There are few published accounts of experiences with consanguinity and SNP arrays. In this paper we discuss three cases where molecular evidence of parental incest was identified by SNP microarray. We hope to further highlight consanguinity as a potential incidental finding, how the cases were handled by the clinical team, and what resources were found to be most helpful. This paper aims to contribute further to professional discourse on incidental findings with genomic technology and how they were addressed clinically. These experiences may provide some guidance on how others can prepare for these findings and help improve practice. As genetic and genomic testing is utilized more by non-genetics providers, we also hope to inform about the importance of engaging with geneticists and genetic counselors when addressing these findings.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 11/2013; 23(4). · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The underlying ethos of dbGaP is that access to these data by secondary data analysts facilitates advancement of science. NIH has required that genome-wide association study data be deposited in the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) since 2003. In 2013, a proposed updated policy extended this requirement to next-generation sequencing data. However, recent literature and anecdotal reports suggest lingering logistical and ethical concerns about subject identifiability, informed consent, publication embargo enforcement, and difficulty in accessing dbGaP data. We surveyed the International Genetic Epidemiology Society (IGES) membership about their experiences. One hundred and seventy five (175) individuals completed the survey, a response rate of 27%. Of respondents who received data from dbGaP (43%), only 32% perceived the application process as easy but most (75%) received data within five months. Remaining challenges include difficulty in identifying an institutional signing official and an overlong application process. Only 24% of respondents had contributed data to dbGaP. Of these, 31% reported local IRB restrictions on data release; an additional 15% had to reconsent study participants before depositing data. The majority of respondents (56%) disagreed that the publication embargo period was sufficient. In response, we recommend longer embargo periods and use of varied data-sharing models rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 08/2014; 11:8383-8398. · 1.99 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 10, 2014