» Articles » PMID: 33223530

Opportunistic Genomic Screening. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics

Abstract

If genome sequencing is performed in health care, in theory the opportunity arises to take a further look at the data: opportunistic genomic screening (OGS). The European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) in 2013 recommended that genome analysis should be restricted to the original health problem at least for the time being. Other organizations have argued that 'actionable' genetic variants should or could be reported (including American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, French Society of Predictive and Personalized Medicine, Genomics England). They argue that the opportunity should be used to routinely and systematically look for secondary findings-so-called opportunistic screening. From a normative perspective, the distinguishing characteristic of screening is not so much its context (whether public health or health care), but the lack of an indication for having this specific test or investigation in those to whom screening is offered. Screening entails a more precarious benefits-to-risks balance. The ESHG continues to recommend a cautious approach to opportunistic screening. Proportionality and autonomy must be guaranteed, and in collectively funded health-care systems the potential benefits must be balanced against health care expenditures. With regard to genome sequencing in pediatrics, ESHG argues that it is premature to look for later-onset conditions in children. Counseling should be offered and informed consent is and should be a central ethical norm. Depending on developing evidence on penetrance, actionability, and available resources, OGS pilots may be justified to generate data for a future, informed, comparative analysis of OGS and its main alternatives, such as cascade testing.

Citing Articles

Pancreatic incidentaloma: incidental findings from history towards the era of liquid biopsy.

Lohr J, Vujasinovic M, Kartalis N, Osten P eGastroenterology. 2025; 2(3):e100082.

PMID: 39944362 PMC: 11770461. DOI: 10.1136/egastro-2024-100082.


The dilemma of X-linked agammaglobulinemia carriers.

Pulvirenti F, Milito C, Cinetto F, Garzi G, Sardella G, Spadaro G J Allergy Clin Immunol Glob. 2025; 4(1):100384.

PMID: 39867744 PMC: 11759626. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacig.2024.100384.


"I'm quite proud of how we've handled it": health professionals' experiences of returning additional findings from the 100,000 genomes project.

Stafford-Smith B, Gurasashvili J, Peter M, Daniel M, Balasubramanian M, Bownass L Eur J Hum Genet. 2024; .

PMID: 39496896 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-024-01716-6.


Negative results from DNA-based population screening for adult-onset diseases: the recipients' experience.

Russo F, Chatterjee D, DeMaria N, Florido M, Marasa M, Sabatello M J Community Genet. 2024; 15(6):653-664.

PMID: 39373866 PMC: 11645380. DOI: 10.1007/s12687-024-00736-5.


International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review.

Majeed S, Johnston C, Saeedi S, Mighton C, Rokoszak V, Abbasi I Am J Hum Genet. 2024; 111(10):2079-2093.

PMID: 39299240 PMC: 11480791. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.08.012.


References
1.
Boycott K, Hartley T, Adam S, Bernier F, Chong K, Fernandez B . The clinical application of genome-wide sequencing for monogenic diseases in Canada: Position Statement of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists. J Med Genet. 2015; 52(7):431-7. PMC: 4501167. DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2015-103144. View

2.
Green R, Berg J, Grody W, Kalia S, Korf B, Martin C . ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med. 2013; 15(7):565-74. PMC: 3727274. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.73. View

3.
Pujol P, Vande Perre P, Faivre L, Sanlaville D, Corsini C, Baertschi B . Guidelines for reporting secondary findings of genome sequencing in cancer genes: the SFMPP recommendations. Eur J Hum Genet. 2018; 26(12):1732-1742. PMC: 6244405. DOI: 10.1038/s41431-018-0224-1. View

4.
Holtzman N . ACMG recommendations on incidental findings are flawed scientifically and ethically. Genet Med. 2013; 15(9):750-1. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2013.96. View

5.
Isidor B, Julia S, Saugier-Veber P, Weil-Dubuc P, Bezieau S, Bieth E . Searching for secondary findings: considering actionability and preserving the right not to know. Eur J Hum Genet. 2019; 27(10):1481-1484. PMC: 6777524. DOI: 10.1038/s41431-019-0438-x. View