Lost in translation: returning germline genetic results in genome-scale cancer research

Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Amber L. Johns(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Skye McKay(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Jeremy L. Humphris(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Mark Pinese(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Lorraine A. Chantrill(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), R. Scott Mead(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Katherine Tucker(Prince of Wales Hospital), Lesley Andrews(Royal Prince Alfred Hospital), Annabel Goodwin(QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute), Conrad Leonard(QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute), Hilda A. High(QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute), Kátia Nones(QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute), Ann‐Marie Patch(QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute), Neil D. Merrett(The University of Sydney), Nick Pavlakis(South Australia Pathology), Karin S. Kassahn(South Australia Pathology), Jaswinder S. Samra(Illumina (United States)), David K. Miller(Illumina (United States)), David K. Chang(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), Marina Pajic(Garvan Institute of Medical Research), John V. Pearson(The University of Melbourne), Sean M. Grimmond(The University of Melbourne), Nicola Waddell(St John of God Subiaco Hospital), Nikolajs Zeps(St John of God Subiaco Hospital), Anthony J. Gill(The University of Sydney), Andrew V. Biankin(Garvan Institute of Medical Research)
Genome Medicine
April 28, 2017
Cited by 83Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The return of research results (RoR) remains a complex and well-debated issue. Despite the debate, actual data related to the experience of giving individual results back, and the impact these results may have on clinical care and health outcomes, is sorely lacking. Through the work of the Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative (APGI) we: (1) delineate the pathway back to the patient where actionable research data were identified; and (2) report the clinical utilisation of individual results returned. Using this experience, we discuss barriers and opportunities associated with a comprehensive process of RoR in large-scale genomic research that may be useful for others developing their own policies. METHODS: We performed whole-genome (n = 184) and exome (n = 208) sequencing of matched tumour-normal DNA pairs from 392 patients with sporadic pancreatic cancer (PC) as part of the APGI. We identified pathogenic germline mutations in candidate genes (n = 130) with established predisposition to PC or medium-high penetrance genes with well-defined cancer associated syndromes or phenotypes. Variants from candidate genes were annotated and classified according to international guidelines. Variants were considered actionable if clinical utility was established, with regard to prevention, diagnosis, prognostication and/or therapy. RESULTS: A total of 48,904 germline variants were identified, with 2356 unique variants undergoing annotation and in silico classification. Twenty cases were deemed actionable and were returned via previously described RoR framework, representing an actionable finding rate of 5.1%. Overall, 1.78% of our cohort experienced clinical benefit from RoR. CONCLUSION: Returning research results within the context of large-scale genomics research is a labour-intensive, highly variable, complex operation. Results that warrant action are not infrequent, but the prevalence of those who experience a clinical difference as a result of returning individual results is currently low.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis