Paediatric genomic testing: Navigating genomic reports for the general paediatrician.

Monogenic rare disorders contribute significantly to paediatric morbidity and mortality, and elucidation of the underlying genetic cause may have benefits for patients, families and clinicians. Advances in genomic technology have enabled diagnostic yields of up to 50% in some paediatric cohorts. This has led to an increase in the uptake of genetic testing across paediatric disciplines. This can place an increased burden on paediatricians, who may now be responsible for interpreting and explaining test results to patients. However, genomic results can be complex, and sometimes inconclusive for the ordering paediatrician. Results may also cause uncertainty and anxiety for patients and their families. The paediatrician's genetic literacy and knowledge of genetic principles are therefore critical to inform discussions with families and guide ongoing patient care. Here, we present four hypothetical case vignettes where genomic testing is undertaken, and discuss possible results and their implications for paediatricians and families. We also provide a list of key terms for paediatricians.

Paediatric genomic testing: Navigating medicare rebatable genomic testing.

Genomic testing for a genetic diagnosis is becoming standard of care for many children, especially those with a syndromal intellectual disability. While previously this type of specialised testing was performed mainly by clinical genetics teams, it is increasingly being 'mainstreamed' into standard paediatric care. With the introduction of a new Medicare rebate for genomic testing in May 2020, this type of testing is now available for paediatricians to order, in consultation with clinical genetics. Children must be aged less than 10 years with facial dysmorphism and multiple congenital abnormalities or have global developmental delay or moderate to severe intellectual disability. This rebate should increase the likelihood of a genetic diagnosis, with accompanying benefits for patient management, reproductive planning and diagnostic certainty. Similar to the introduction of chromosomal microarray into mainstream paediatrics, this genomic testing will increase the number of genetic diagnoses, however, will also yield more variants of uncertain significance, incidental findings, and negative results. This paper aims to guide paediatricians through the process of genomic testing, and represents the combined expertise of educators, clinical geneticists, paediatricians and genomic pathologists around Australia. Its purpose is to help paediatricians navigate choosing the right genomic test, consenting patients and understanding the possible outcomes of testing.

'A sword of Damocles': patient and caregiver beliefs, attitudes and perspectives on presymptomatic testing for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Presymptomatic testing is available for early diagnosis of hereditary autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). However, the complex ethical and psychosocial implications can make decision-making challenging and require an understanding of patients' values, goals and priorities. This study aims to describe patient and caregiver beliefs and expectations regarding presymptomatic testing for ADPKD. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 154 participants (120 patients and 34 caregivers) aged 18 years and over from eight centres in Australia, France and Korea participated in 17 focus groups. Transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: We identified five themes: avoiding financial disadvantage (insecurity in the inability to obtain life insurance, limited work opportunities, financial burden); futility in uncertainty (erratic and diverse manifestations of disease limiting utility, taking preventive actions in vain, daunted by perplexity of results, unaware of risk of inheriting ADPKD); lacking autonomy and support in decisions (overwhelmed by ambiguous information, medicalising family planning, family pressures); seizing control of well-being (gaining confidence in early detection, allowing preparation for the future, reassurance in family resilience); and anticipating impact on quality of life (reassured by lack of symptoms, judging value of life with ADPKD). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with ADPKD, presymptomatic testing provides an opportunity to take ownership of their health through family planning and preventive measures. However, these decisions can be wrought with tensions and uncertainty about prognostic implications, and the psychosocial and financial burden of testing. Healthcare professionals should focus on genetic counselling, mental health and providing education to patients' families to support informed decision-making. Policymakers should consider the cost burden and risk of discrimination when informing government policies. Finally, patients are recommended to focus on self-care from an early age.

An Australian tuberous sclerosis cohort: are surveillance guidelines being met?

AIM: This study aims to describe the phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of 45 Australian patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), to assess risk factors for intellectual disability, to compare patients with TSC1 and TSC2 mutations and to assess adherence to surveillance recommendations. METHODS: Phenotypic features were recorded in 45 patients who fulfilled established criteria for a diagnosis of definite TSC. All patients underwent TSC1 and TSC2 sequencing and multiplex ligand probe amplification. Features were compared in patients with TSC1 mutations versus TSC2 mutations. Recent surveillance was recorded at the point of first contact. Surveillance adherence was compared in the adult and paediatric cohorts. RESULTS: This cohort consisted of 31 children and 14 adults with definite TSC. The rates of TSC manifestations and TSC1 and TSC2 mutation detection rates were consistent with previous studies. There was a trend towards greater severity for patients with TSC2 mutations compared with their TSC1 counterparts, particularly for autistic spectrum disorder, but this did not reach statistical significance. The presence of seizures was shown to be a risk factor for intellectual disability (P < 0.001). Overall, 12/45 patients (27%) were not undergoing recommended surveillance at the point of first contact. Surveillance guidelines were being followed in 3/31 (11%) children compared with 9/14 (64%) adult patients (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The genotypic and phenotypic characteristics of this TSC cohort were consistent with previous studies. Surveillance rates in adult patients were significantly lower than in paediatric patients. This highlights the need for patients with TSC to undergo a focussed transition into adult services.