The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network is a National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)-funded consortium engaged in the development of methods and best-practices for utilizing the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) as a tool for genomic research. Now in its sixth year, its second funding cycle and comprising nine research groups and a coordinating center, the network has played a major role in validating the concept that clinical data derived from EMRs can be used successfully for genomic research. Current work is advancing knowledge in multiple disciplines at the intersection of genomics and healthcare informatics, particularly electronic phenotyping, genome-wide association studies, genomic medicine implementation and the ethical and regulatory issues associated with genomics research and returning results to study participants. Here we describe the evolution, accomplishments, opportunities and challenges of the network since its inception as a five-group consortium focused on genotype-phenotype associations for genomic discovery to its current form as a nine-group consortium pivoting towards implementation of genomic medicine.

Whole exome/genome sequencing (WES/WGS) is increasingly offered to ostensibly healthy individuals. Understanding the motivations and concerns of research participants seeking out personal WGS and their preferences regarding return-of-results and data sharing will help optimize protocols for WES/WGS. Baseline interviews including both qualitative and quantitative components were conducted with research participants (n=35) in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal WGS results. Data sharing preferences were recorded during informed consent. In the qualitative interview component, the dominant motivations that emerged were obtaining personal disease risk information, satisfying curiosity, contributing to research, self-exploration and interest in ancestry, and the dominant concern was the potential psychological impact of the results. In the quantitative component, 57% endorsed concerns about privacy. Most wanted to receive all personal WGS results (94%) and their raw data (89%); a third (37%) consented to having their data shared to the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP). Early adopters of personal WGS in the HealthSeq project express a variety of health- and non-health-related motivations. Almost all want all available findings, while also expressing concerns about the psychological impact and privacy of their results.

Patients from traditionally underrepresented communities need to be involved in discussions around genomics research including attitudes towards participation and receiving personal results. Structured interviews, including openended and closed-ended questions, were conducted with 205 patients in an inner-city hospital outpatient clinic: 48 % of participants self-identified as Black or African American, 29 % Hispanic, 10 % White; 49 % had an annual household income of <$20,000. When the potential for personal results to be returned was not mentioned, 82 % of participants were willing to participate in genomics research. Reasons for willingness fell into four themes: altruism; benefit to family members; personal health benefit; personal curiosity and improving understanding. Reasons for being unwilling fell into five themes: negative perception of research; not personally relevant; negative feelings about procedures (e.g., blood draws); practical barriers; and fear of results. Participants were more likely to report that they would participate in genomics research if personal results were offered than if they were not offered (89 vs. 62 % respectively, p<0.001). Participants were Community Genet (2013) 4:469-482 DOI 10.1007 more interested in receiving personal genomic risk results for cancer, heart disease and type 2 diabetes than obesity (89, 89, 91, 80 % respectively, all p<0.001). The only characteristic consistently associated with interest in receiving personal results was disease-specific worry. There was considerable willingness to participate in and desire for personal results from genomics research in this sample of predominantly lowincome, Hispanic and African American patients. When returning results is not practical, or even when it is, alternatively or additionally providing generic information about genomics and health may also be a valuable commodity to underrepresented minority and other populations considering participating in genomics research.

Providing ostensibly healthy individuals with personal results from whole-genome sequencing could lead to improved health and well-being via enhanced disease risk prediction, prevention, and diagnosis, but also poses practical and ethical challenges. Understanding how individuals react psychologically and behaviourally will be key in assessing the potential utility of personal whole-genome sequencing. We conducted an exploratory longitudinal cohort study in which quantitative surveys and in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted before and after personal results were returned to individuals who underwent whole-genome sequencing. The participants were offered a range of interpreted results, including Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes, pharmacogenomics, rare disease-associated variants, and ancestry. They were also offered their raw data. Of the 35 participants at baseline, 29 (82.9%) completed the 6-month follow-up. In the quantitative surveys, test-related distress was low, although it was higher at 1-week than 6-month follow-up (Z=2.68, P=0.007). In the 6-month qualitative interviews, most participants felt happy or relieved about their results. A few were concerned, particularly about rare disease-associated variants and Alzheimer's disease results. Two of the 29 participants had sought clinical follow-up as a direct or indirect consequence of rare disease-associated variants results. Several had mentioned their results to their doctors. Some participants felt having their raw data might be medically useful to them in the future. The majority reported positive reactions to having their genomes sequenced, but there were notable exceptions to this. The impact and value of returning personal results from whole-genome sequencing when implemented on a larger scale remains to be seen.

People of African ancestry (Blacks) have increased risk of kidney failure due to numerous socioeconomic, environmental, and clinical factors. Two variants in the APOL1 gene are now thought to account for much of the racial disparity associated with hypertensive kidney failure in Blacks. However, this knowledge has not been translated into clinical care to help improve patient outcomes and address disparities. GUARDD is a randomized trial to evaluate the effects and challenges of incorporating genetic risk information into primary care. Hypertensive, non-diabetic, adults with self-reported African ancestry, without kidney dysfunction, are recruited from diverse clinical settings and randomized to undergo APOL1 genetic testing at baseline (intervention) or at one year (waitlist control). Providers are educated about genomics and APOL1. Guided by a Correspondence to: CR Horowitz, carol.horowitz@mssm.edu. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02234063Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. partnership designed a study to generate information about the impact of genetic risk information on patient care (blood pressure and renal surveillance) and on patient and provider knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. GUARDD will help establish the effective implementation of APOL1 risk-informed management of hypertensive patients at high risk of CKD, and will provide a robust framework for future endeavors to implement genomic medicine in diverse clinical practices. It will also add to the important dialogue about factors that contribute to and may help eliminate racial disparities in kidney disease. HHS Public Access