Cross-posted from the Nature News Blog
Imagine getting a chest X-ray to identify the cause of a serious cough. The radiologist finds a shadow that wasn’t causing the cough but could be a tumor. In many cases, it is obvious what to do upon uncovering these sorts of secondary or incidental findings — most doctors would follow up on the search for a possible lung tumor, for example.
But genomic information presents a special case: genes are predictive, but not perfectly so, making some results murky. And many genetic diseases and predispositions to disease don’t have clear and obvious paths for clinical management, potentially making them a lifelong psychological burden.
Today, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) released recommendations for how genome-sequencing laboratories should report incidental findings after a doctor orders a full or partial genome sequence. It defines a minimum list of about 60 genes and 30 conditions that should be reported to the doctor as part of a patient’s care, whether the patient wants to know them or not. But the guidelines stop far short of recommending that all risk factors be passed on to doctors and patients.