Exome sequencing study in a clinical research setting finds general acceptance of study returning secondary genomic findings with little decisional conflict

J Genet Couns. 2021 Jun;30(3):766-773. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1367. Epub 2020 Dec 15.

Abstract

The most appropriate strategies for managing secondary genomic findings (SF) in clinical research are being developed and evaluated. We surveyed patients at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) to evaluate decisional conflict regarding enrolling in a study that returns SF. Responses were collected using a cross-sectional survey after informed consent but before return of SF. Sixty-six adults of 116 eligible participants responded. No participant explicitly declined because they did not want to possibly receive a SF. Sixty-five of 66 (98%) participants thought it was appropriate to return SFs in research; one participant was unsure. Decisional conflict regarding enrolling in a study returning SF was low overall with 68% of participants reporting a score of less than 10 on a 100-point decisional conflict scale, implying that they felt informed, clear on what they wanted, and supported. Lower genetic literacy was weakly associated with higher decisional conflict (Spearman's rho = -0.297, p = .015). Six participants reported confusion related to the choices about SFs. Our data suggest that participants in our study feel it is appropriate to receive SF and have little decisional conflict about potentially receiving such information; however, some participants may need further education and counseling.

Keywords: clinical research; decision-making; exome sequencing; genetic counseling; literacy; secondary findings.

Publication types

  • Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Decision Making*
  • Exome*
  • Genomics
  • Humans
  • Surveys and Questionnaires