Return of Genomic Results and Aggregate Penetrance in Population-Based Cohorts (PopSeq)

The PopSeq Project is a prospective cohort study that will develop and implement a genomic return of results (gRoR) process in the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) and Jackson Heart Study (JHS) cohorts and explore associated medical, behavioral, and economic outcomes. The study will interpret the genomic sequences of JHS/FHS participants previously sequenced by TOPMed who have consented to genomic return of results and/or genetic testing. We will develop and apply new methods for scalable screening/ classification of genomic variants and will explore genomic penetrance by phenotyping a subset of participants in the FHS and JHS.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Seemingly Healthy
• Intervention / Treatment: Genetic: Genomic Sequencing

Detailed Description

The objectives of this project are to: 1) Return clinically actionable genomic results to participants and track outcomes. Among living FHS/JHS participants who have consented to gRoR, we will contact those in whom a detrimental actionable variant is discovered in one of the genes noted on the ACMG recommended secondary findings list (estimate 2% of participants). 2) Improve high-throughput methods for identifying valid pathogenic variation. Refine and apply methods for high throughput screening of FHS/JHS genomes in a manner that retains high sensitivity for the detection of detrimental variants in ~3500 Mendelian disease-associated genes while reducing the false discovery rate of variants that are not pathogenic/likely pathogenic. 3) Explore aggregate penetrance for Mendelian diseases. Review phenotype data from a subset of FHS and JHS participants and compare this to genotypic data.

Data to be gathered include outcome and phenotypic data on the individuals who agree to gRoR and who learn that they have detrimental variant in one of the ACMG listed genes. These data will be self-reported through surveys and available medical records will be reviewed. Additional phenotypic data may be collected and reviewed for other non-actionable mendelian disease genes to explore genomic penetrance.

Research participants who are identified with a detrimental variant in an actionable gene may receive direct health benefits from learning this information; however, returning genomic results to healthy individuals not presenting for a medical indication may pose unexpected harms related to variant directed increases in screening and management. This study is focused on exploring the benefits and any potential harms related to returning genomic information in population-based cohorts. It will also allow us to better understand the penetrance of these variants in two populations not selected for disease status and will allow us to compare outcomes in a primarily African American population vs a Caucasian population. Developing methods to streamline variant analysis will help improve laboratory efficiency and will progress the field of variant curation and analysis.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 48
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • Massachusetts
    • Framingham, Massachusetts, United States, 01702
      • Framingham Heart Study
  • Mississippi
    • Jackson, Mississippi, United States, 39213
      • Jackson Heart Study

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 100 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Living individuals enrolled in the Framingham Heart Study and the Jackson Heart Study who have had their genomes sequenced as part of the TOPMed program.
• Adults over the age of 18 years
• Those who have consented to have their DNA samples used for research purposes (and those who participate in gRoR who have consented to receive genomic information).

Exclusion Criteria:

• Participants of the Framingham Heart Study or Jackson Heart Study who have not had their genomes sequenced as part of TOPMed
• Participants who did not opt for genomic/genetic research
• Participants who did/do not consent to receiving a genomic result (for the gRoR portion of this study only)

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Prevention
• Allocation: N/A
• Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

1

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: FHS & JHS participants with an actionable genomic finding; Framingham and Jackson Heart Study participants who have had their genomes sequenced as part of TOPMed will be notified if an actionable genetic result in an ACMG v2.0 gene is identified and will be offered the opportunity to have their research result clinically confirmed by the study.	Genetic: Genomic Sequencing; Whole Genome Sequencing and reporting of actionable genomic results for genes included on the ACMG secondary findings list.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Follow Through with Disclosure	JHS/FHS participants who have been sequenced through TOPMed, are alive and have consented for result return will be notified if an actionable genetic result is discovered. We will contact them and offer them the opportunity to have their research result clinically confirmed. We will evaluate the proportion of individuals who elect to have their result confirmed and disclosed to their health care provider.	From genetic result notification to 8 months post-disclosure
Costs of Disclosure	We will determine the costs and associated time demands of implementing gRoR using a microcosting approach in which study staff track the amount of time they spend and the resources they use for each step of the protocol. For follow-up medical care, we will use a gross costing approach where we apply Centers for Medicare and Medicaid fee schedules to completed referrals and tests, hospitalizations and medication changes identified as described above.	1 year post-disclosure

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Guideline Compliance	Comparison of participants' personal and family histories of disease and their relevant available medical data against existing guidelines to identify instances where genetic testing and/or referral had been warranted but was never ordered.	History before disclosure
New and Modified Diagnoses	We will examine cases to determine the percentage of individuals with a new or modified diagnosis attributed to results disclosure.	1 year post-disclosure
Self-Rated Health	We will administer a single item of self rated health derived from the SF-12v2.	Post disclosure and 1 year post-disclosure
MD Recommendations	We will review chart notes from results disclosure sessions to determine services recommended in response to genetic findings.	From disclosure to 1 month post-disclosure
Health Care Utilization	We will track health care utilization in response to results disclosure in the one year follow-up survey, including a) referrals and tests, b) hospitalizations, and c) medication changes	1 year post-disclosure

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Health Behaviors	The survey includes a series of standardized yes/no questions to assess whether disclosed genetic information motivated participants to make changes to health behaviors. A summary score will be created based on the number of behaviors that participants report.	1 year post-disclsoure
Disclosure-specific Impact	The survey assess the disclosure-specific impact of information on distress and positive emotions using an adapted 8-item version of the FaCTOR, a validated instrument developed for genomic sequencing that is sensitive to responses to high- and low-risk genetic risk results.	6 months post-disclosure
Satisfaction with Disclsoure	Surveys will assess how helpful participants felt the results disclosure session was using a novel single question.	6 months post-disclosure and 1 year post-disclosure
Decisional Regret	Surveys will assess if participants regretted their decisions to receive their genetic findings using a novel single question.	6 months post-disclosure and 1 year post-disclosure
Sharing with Relatives	The survey will assess with how many relatives participants shared their genetic information.	1 year post-disclsoure
Family Testing	The survey will assess whether participants had relatives that received genetic testing based on disclosure to the participant.	1 year post-disclsoure
General Anxiety	We will measure general anxiety using the General Anxiety Disorder Scale 2 (GAD-2), a validated 2-item instrument that will allow investigators to identify individuals with a potential mood disorder.	Post-disclosure and 6 months post-disclosure

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Brigham and Women's Hospital
• Collaborators: Boston University; Partners HealthCare; University of Mississippi Medical Center; Framingham Heart Study; Jackson Heart Study; Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Wolf SM, Branum R, Koenig BA, Petersen GM, Berry SA, Beskow LM, Daly MB, Fernandez CV, Green RC, LeRoy BS, Lindor NM, O'Rourke PP, Breitkopf CR, Rothstein MA, Van Ness B, Wilfond BS. Returning a Research Participant's Genomic Results to Relatives: Analysis and Recommendations. J Law Med Ethics. 2015 Fall;43(3):440-63. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12288.
• Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, Kahn JP, Cho MK, Clayton EW, Fletcher JG, Georgieff MK, Hammerschmidt D, Hudson K, Illes J, Kapur V, Keane MA, Koenig BA, Leroy BS, McFarland EG, Paradise J, Parker LS, Terry SF, Van Ness B, Wilfond BS. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics. 2008 Summer;36(2):219-48, 211. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00266.x.
• Vassy JL, Lautenbach DM, McLaughlin HM, Kong SW, Christensen KD, Krier J, Kohane IS, Feuerman LZ, Blumenthal-Barby J, Roberts JS, Lehmann LS, Ho CY, Ubel PA, MacRae CA, Seidman CE, Murray MF, McGuire AL, Rehm HL, Green RC; MedSeq Project. The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine. Trials. 2014 Mar 20;15:85. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-85.
• McLaughlin HM, Ceyhan-Birsoy O, Christensen KD, Kohane IS, Krier J, Lane WJ, Lautenbach D, Lebo MS, Machini K, MacRae CA, Azzariti DR, Murray MF, Seidman CE, Vassy JL, Green RC, Rehm HL; MedSeq Project. A systematic approach to the reporting of medically relevant findings from whole genome sequencing. BMC Med Genet. 2014 Dec 14;15:134. doi: 10.1186/s12881-014-0134-1.
• Vassy JL, Christensen KD, Schonman EF, Blout CL, Robinson JO, Krier JB, Diamond PM, Lebo M, Machini K, Azzariti DR, Dukhovny D, Bates DW, MacRae CA, Murray MF, Rehm HL, McGuire AL, Green RC; MedSeq Project. The Impact of Whole-Genome Sequencing on the Primary Care and Outcomes of Healthy Adult Patients: A Pilot Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017 Jun 27;167(3):159-169. doi: 10.7326/M17-0188. Print 2017 Aug 1.
• Christensen KD, Vassy JL, Phillips KA, Blout CL, Azzariti DR, Lu CY, Robinson JO, Lee K, Douglas MP, Yeh JM, Machini K, Stout NK, Rehm HL, McGuire AL, Green RC, Dukhovny D; MedSeq Project. Short-term costs of integrating whole-genome sequencing into primary care and cardiology settings: a pilot randomized trial. Genet Med. 2018 Dec;20(12):1544-1553. doi: 10.1038/gim.2018.35. Epub 2018 Mar 22.
• Lupo PJ, Robinson JO, Diamond PM, Jamal L, Danysh HE, Blumenthal-Barby J, Lehmann LS, Vassy JL, Christensen KD, Green RC, McGuire AL; MedSeq Project team. Patients' perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing for their healthcare: findings from the MedSeq project. Per Med. 2016 Jan 1;13(1):13-20. doi: 10.2217/pme.15.45. Epub 2016 Jan 8.
• Biesecker LG, Green RC. Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2014 Sep 18;371(12):1170. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1408914. No abstract available.
• Wolf SM, Crock BN, Van Ness B, Lawrenz F, Kahn JP, Beskow LM, Cho MK, Christman MF, Green RC, Hall R, Illes J, Keane M, Knoppers BM, Koenig BA, Kohane IS, Leroy B, Maschke KJ, McGeveran W, Ossorio P, Parker LS, Petersen GM, Richardson HS, Scott JA, Terry SF, Wilfond BS, Wolf WA. Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genet Med. 2012 Apr;14(4):361-84. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.23.
• Burke W, Evans BJ, Jarvik GP. Return of results: ethical and legal distinctions between research and clinical care. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2014 Mar;166C(1):105-11. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31393. Epub 2014 Mar 10.
• National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group; Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR, Puggal M, Beskow LM, Biesecker LG, Bookman E, Burke W, Burchard EG, Church G, Clayton EW, Eckfeldt JH, Fernandez CV, Fisher R, Fullerton SM, Gabriel S, Gachupin F, James C, Jarvik GP, Kittles R, Leib JR, O'Donnell C, O'Rourke PP, Rodriguez LL, Schully SD, Shuldiner AR, Sze RK, Thakuria JV, Wolf SM, Burke GL. Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2010 Dec;3(6):574-80. doi: 10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.110.958827.
• Natarajan P, Gold NB, Bick AG, McLaughlin H, Kraft P, Rehm HL, Peloso GM, Wilson JG, Correa A, Seidman JG, Seidman CE, Kathiresan S, Green RC. Aggregate penetrance of genomic variants for actionable disorders in European and African Americans. Sci Transl Med. 2016 Nov 9;8(364):364ra151. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aag2367.
• Christensen KD, Phillips KA, Green RC, Dukhovny D. Cost Analyses of Genomic Sequencing: Lessons Learned from the MedSeq Project. Value Health. 2018 Sep;21(9):1054-1061. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.06.013. Epub 2018 Aug 14.
• Roberts JS, Robinson JO, Diamond PM, Bharadwaj A, Christensen KD, Lee KB, Green RC, McGuire AL; MedSeq Project team. Patient understanding of, satisfaction with, and perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing: findings from the MedSeq Project. Genet Med. 2018 Sep;20(9):1069-1076. doi: 10.1038/gim.2017.223. Epub 2018 Jan 4.
• Christensen KD, Dukhovny D, Siebert U, Green RC. Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing. J Pers Med. 2015 Dec 10;5(4):470-86. doi: 10.3390/jpm5040470.
• Machini K, Ceyhan-Birsoy O, Azzariti DR, Sharma H, Rossetti P, Mahanta L, Hutchinson L, McLaughlin H; MedSeq Project; Green RC, Lebo M, Rehm HL. Analyzing and Reanalyzing the Genome: Findings from the MedSeq Project. Am J Hum Genet. 2019 Jul 3;105(1):177-188. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.05.017. Epub 2019 Jun 27.
• Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, Kalia SS, Korf BR, Martin CL, McGuire AL, Nussbaum RL, O'Daniel JM, Ormond KE, Rehm HL, Watson MS, Williams MS, Biesecker LG; American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med. 2013 Jul;15(7):565-74. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.73. Epub 2013 Jun 20.
• Kalia SS, Adelman K, Bale SJ, Chung WK, Eng C, Evans JP, Herman GE, Hufnagel SB, Klein TE, Korf BR, McKelvey KD, Ormond KE, Richards CS, Vlangos CN, Watson M, Martin CL, Miller DT. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2017 Feb;19(2):249-255. doi: 10.1038/gim.2016.190. Epub 2016 Nov 17.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): June 9, 2021
• Primary Completion (Actual): May 30, 2025
• Study Completion (Actual): May 30, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: December 10, 2019
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: December 10, 2019
• First Posted (Actual): December 12, 2019

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): November 12, 2025
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 10, 2025
• Last Verified: November 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Pathologic Processes; Disease Attributes; Disease Susceptibility; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms; Genetic Predisposition to Disease
• Other Study ID Numbers: R01HL143295 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO
• IPD Plan Description: Individual participant data will not be shared. Aggregate data will be shared through publication and will be considered upon request.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No