Abstract
Background Disease severity is considered to be an important factor for inclusion of diseases on expanded carrier screening (ECS) panels. Evaluating severity requires an objective, systematic method. Here, we applied a validated algorithm that objectively categorizes disease severity into one of four categories—profound, severe, moderate, and mild—to 176 genes on a clinically available ECS panel.
Methods Eight genetic counselors (GCs) working in pairs, followed by four medical geneticists (MDs) working in pairs, applied the algorithm to subsets of the 176 genes.
Results Upon initial GC and MD review, 107/176 genes (61%) and 133/176 genes (76%), respectively, had concordant classifications, with consensus reached for all genes after collaborative review. Final severity classifications were 68 (39%) profound, 71 (40%) severe, 36 (20%) moderate, and one (1%) mild. No classification biases were detected within the GC or MD pairs.
Conclusion This study illustrates an approach to severity classification for large sets of Mendelian genes. The observed level of initial discordance demonstrates the complexity of severity and underscores the importance of collaboration involving multiple clinicians. Severity classification, in addition to other factors suggested by ACOG, is an important factor for laboratories to consider as they aim to design clinically valid ECS panels.
Competing Interest Statement
Aishwarya Arjunan, Holly Bellerose, Katherine Johansen Taber, Raul Torres, Jennifer Tarpinian, and Gabriel A. Lazarin are all current or former employees of Myriad Women’s Health. Jodi D. Hoffman, Brad Angle, Robert Nathan Slotnick, Brittany N. Simpson, Andrea M. Lewis, Pilar L. Magoulas, Kelly Bontempo, Jeanine Schulze, Jennifer Tarpinian, Jessica A. Bucher, Richard Dineen, and Allison Goetsch all received honoraria from Myriad Women’s Health to participate in this study. There are no other conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵‡ JT was an employee of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia at the time of study and has since moved to Myriad Women’s Health. GAL was an employee of Myriad Women’s Health at the time of study.
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on request.
