Challenges and opportunities for integrating genetic testing into a diagnostic workflow: heritable long QT syndrome as a model.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of diagnostic evaluations incorporate genetic testing to facilitate accurate and timely diagnoses. The increasing number and complexity of genetic tests continue to pose challenges in deciding when to test, selecting the correct test(s), and using results to inform medical diagnoses, especially for medical professionals lacking genetic expertise. Careful consideration of a diagnostic workflow can be helpful in understanding the appropriate uses of genetic testing within a broader diagnostic workup. CONTENT: The diagnosis of long QT syndrome (LQTS), a life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia, provides an example for this approach. Electrocardiography is the preferred means for diagnosing LQTS but can be uninformative for some patients due to the variable presentation of the condition. Family history and genetic testing can augment physiological testing to inform a diagnosis and subsequent therapy. Clinical and laboratory professionals informed by peer- reviewed literature and professional recommendations constructed a generalized LQTS diagnostic workflow. This workflow served to explore decisions regarding the use of genetic testing for diagnosing LQTS. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK: Understanding the complexities and approaches to integrating genetic testing into a broader diagnostic evaluation is anticipated to support appropriate test utilization, optimize diagnostic evaluation, and facilitate a multidisciplinary approach essential for achieving accurate and timely diagnoses.

Recent Increase in COVID-19 Cases Reported Among Adults Aged 18-22 Years - United States, May 31-September 5, 2020.

Although children and young adults are reportedly at lower risk for severe disease and death from infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), than are persons in other age groups (1), younger persons can experience infection and subsequently transmit infection to those at higher risk for severe illness (2-4). Although at lower risk for severe disease, some young adults experience serious illness, and asymptomatic or mild cases can result in sequelae such as myocardial inflammation (5). In the United States, approximately 45% of persons aged 18-22 years were enrolled in colleges and universities in 2019 (6). As these institutions reopen, opportunities for infection increase; therefore, mitigation efforts and monitoring reports of COVID-19 cases among young adults are important. During August 2-September 5, weekly incidence of COVID-19 among persons aged 18-22 years rose by 55.1% nationally; across U.S. Census regions,* increases were greatest in the Northeast, where incidence increased 144.0%, and Midwest, where incidence increased 123.4%. During the same period, changes in testing volume for SARS-CoV-2 in this age group ranged from a 6.2% decline in the West to a 170.6% increase in the Northeast. In addition, the proportion of cases in this age group among non-Hispanic White (White) persons increased from 33.8% to 77.3% during May 31-September 5. Mitigation and preventive measures targeted to young adults can likely reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission among their contacts and communities. As colleges and universities resume operations, taking steps to prevent the spread of COVID-19 among young adults is critical (7).

Principles and Recommendations for Standardizing the Use of the Next-Generation Sequencing Variant File in Clinical Settings.

A national workgroup convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified principles and made recommendations for standardizing the description of sequence data contained within the variant file generated during the course of clinical next-generation sequence analysis for diagnosing human heritable conditions. The specifications for variant files were initially developed to be flexible with regard to content representation to support a variety of research applications. This flexibility permits variation with regard to how sequence findings are described and this depends, in part, on the conventions used. For clinical laboratory testing, this poses a problem because these differences can compromise the capability to compare sequence findings among laboratories to confirm results and to query databases to identify clinically relevant variants. To provide for a more consistent representation of sequence findings described within variant files, the workgroup made several recommendations that considered alignment to a common reference sequence, variant caller settings, use of genomic coordinates, and gene and variant naming conventions. These recommendations were considered with regard to the existing variant file specifications presently used in the clinical setting. Adoption of these recommendations is anticipated to reduce the potential for ambiguity in describing sequence findings and facilitate the sharing of genomic data among clinical laboratories and other entities.