Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Genomics in routine clinical care: what does this mean for primary care?

Judith Hayward, Michelle Bishop, Imran Rafi and Val Davison
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (655): 58-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X688945
Judith Hayward
Shipley Medical Practice, Bradford, GPwSI Yorkshire and Humber Genomics Medicine Centre, Leeds. Primary Care Advisor to Genomics Education Programme, Health Education England, Leeds.
Roles: GP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michelle Bishop
Genomics Education Programme, Health Education England, London.
Roles: Education Development Specialist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Imran Rafi
Senior Lecturer Primary Care Education, St George’s University of London, Chair RCGP Clinical Innovation and Research Centre, London.
Roles: GP Principal
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Val Davison
Genomics Education Programme, Health Education England, London.
Roles: Scientific Director
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

‘The NHS will need to be ready to use genomics as part of its routine care 1

But how will genomics impact on primary care and what is needed for primary care to be genomics-ready?

While genetics focuses on DNA coding for single functional genes, genomics is the study of the entirety of our DNA, recognising the crucial regulatory role of non-coding DNA and the complex interactions between multiple genes and the environment. Genomics and variation is fundamental to precision medicine which, through its four components of predictive, preventive, personalised, and participatory medicine, aims to promote wellness as well as to more precisely treat disease. The transformational 100 000 Genomes Project funded by the Department of Health aspires to kick-start a UK genomics industry and set up a genomics medicine service within the NHS.1 GPs will play an important role within a genomics medicine service both in supporting patients through diagnostic and treatment processes and in using knowledge of genomics for disease prevention.

CANCER

There are 356 000 new cancer cases diagnosed in the UK each year.2 Testing of both the patient’s own genetic makeup (‘germline’ DNA) and the tumour DNA (‘somatic’ testing) are important here.

A tumour’s genomic signature may be used to make a precise diagnosis, enabling more accurate prognosis and better tailored treatment. Examples include Herceptin® (trastuzumab) in breast cancer treatment and BRAF inhibitors in malignant melanoma. Treatment can also be based on germline genomic information; PARP inhibitors are more efficacious in the treatment of ovarian cancer in individuals who carry a BRCA gene mutation.

Cancer follows the principle of complex disease: a proportion of disease risk is determined by a combination of genomic variation and gene–environment interactions, with around 5% attributable to single gene highly penetrant variants which underlie familial cancer syndromes. Perhaps the most well-known of these is breast or ovarian cancer associated with mutations (‘pathogenic variants’ in current nomenclature) in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Identification of these in affected patients and their relatives is important in order to offer targeted prevention such as increased screening (for example magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) or risk-reducing treatment (for example, chemoprevention or risk-reducing mastectomy).3 Primary care already plays a key role in assessing family history to identify these patients; however a sub-set of patients will present with a pathogenic variant identified through a research programme, or direct-to-consumer testing with no relevant family history.

Genomic variation could also enable tailoring of cancer screening programmes, such as breast, prostate or colorectal, through risk stratification at population level. Proof of principle has been provided by the European Commission funded multicentre Collaborative Oncological Gene-environment Study (COGS) on genetic variation and breast cancer risk;4 however implementation of such strategies is not feasible as yet.

RARE DISEASE

Rare diseases are defined as affecting <5 cases per 10 000 (for example cystic fibrosis), and at least 80% are genetic in origin. As a group they affect 1 in 17 of the population and therefore make up a proportion of the primary care caseload. Genomic testing will improve the likelihood of making a molecular and in some cases a clinical diagnosis, thereby avoiding protracted diagnostic journeys with huge emotional cost (the ‘diagnostic odyssey’), and giving a greater understanding of underlying pathology, likely natural history, and responsiveness to various treatments.5 Another important dimension is the familial element; relatives will access primary care for advice regarding risk and reproductive issues.

OTHER COMMON COMPLEX DISEASE AND PHARMACOGENOMICS

Like cancer, common disorders such as diabetes and heart disease are influenced by underlying genetic susceptibility as well as environmental and lifestyle factors. Genomic variants are anticipated to play an increasing role in risk stratification through risk assessment tools alongside phenotypic and sociodemographic data.6

Testing for relevant genetic variants that influence both drug efficacy and drug safety will increasingly be used to aid choice of both drug and dosage. An exemplar is testing for variants in the SCLO1B1 gene which increase the likelihood of simvastatin-induced myopathy, and guidelines informing dosage and statin choice in such patients.7

The implementation of pharmacogenomic testing has been limited by the need for evidence of clinical utility at population level and cost-effectiveness. However cost-effectiveness will improve as technologies allow parallel testing for ‘panels’ of genes at vastly reduced time and cost, with near-patient testing not far away. Development of decision support systems that allow the proven integration of genomic and clinical information to aid prescribing will be of value in the future.

PRACTICAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Nationally a need for service delivery redesign has been identified.8,9 Consider familial hypercholesterolaemia; guidance recommends genotyping to confirm diagnosis,10 yet only a few centres offer this test and it is funded nationally by specialist commissioning. The vast majority of patients are currently managed within primary or secondary care with no direct access or referral pathway to genotyping. As the drive to mainstream genomics testing continues there will be a need to develop clinical pathways with supporting resources such as detailed reports, guidelines, or provision of remote or virtual specialist advice for an increasing number of conditions.

Challenges for development of informatics are also considerable: the integration of genomic data into risk assessment and decision-support tools, embedding of these into primary care systems, and recording and data-handling within primary care records to name just a few. Read Codes are scheduled to be retired with full adoption of SNOMED CT codes (http://www.snomedbrowser.com) into primary care by December 2016; both include diagnostic and carrier status codes for only some inherited conditions, or codes for specific tests but not results. Expansion of the list of conditions with specific codes, inclusion of codes describing genomic test results, and cross-specialty consistency is essential.

It is conceivable in the near future that all of a patient’s genome sequence data could be centralised, enabling access to all professionals involved in their care. IT systems could interrogate a database in order to capture relevant data within the primary care record for specific purposes such as integration into risk tools for common complex disease or personalised prescribing. This raises questions such as who should have access to this information, and where would consent be recorded?

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

The RCGP Curriculum statement ‘Genetics in primary care’ identifies three main roles for primary care: identifying patients with, or at risk of, a genetic condition; clinical management of genetic conditions; and communicating genetic information. It encapsulates knowledge and skills which are transferable to genomics.11 It is not anticipated that GPs will require substantial additional expertise or an in-depth knowledge of genomic variants.6 However they will require an understanding of terminology, principles underpinning the use of genomics in clinical care and ethical issues in order to communicate effectively, support patients, and institute appropriate management. Alongside, it is anticipated that development of ‘just-in-time’ resources for use within the consultation will be crucial; these could include decision-support tools, guidelines, disease summaries, and routes to ‘virtual’ advice from genomics specialists. Health Education England’s (HEE) Genomics Education Programme has outlined its strategy ‘Engaging Primary Care’, launching with an educational needs assessment specific to genomics that aims to inform development of curricula and resources.12

SUMMARY

The 100 000 Genomes Project has accelerated the pace of scientific discovery within genomic medicine which, as a whole, has the potential for wide-ranging effects on health and disease with substantial patient benefit. In order to realise the contribution of genomics to true precision medicine there is still considerable distance to go in mainstreaming and implementation at primary care level. A firm foundation to deliver on this already exists within primary care, in the form of a long-established skill-base in risk communication and shared decision making, and the ability to rapidly incorporate novel management strategies into routine clinical care in the context of the consultation. However, implementation also demands a wider awareness and responsiveness from those responsible for commissioning, informatics and education at all levels in order for primary care to become truly ‘genomics-ready’.

Notes

Provenance

Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2017

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Genomics England
    The 100 000 Genomes Project, https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/the-100000-genomes-project/ (accessed 20 Dec 2016).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Cancer Research UK
    Cancer incidence statistics (Cancer Research UK), http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/incidence (accessed 6 Jan 2017).
  3. 3.↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    (2013) Familial breast cancer: classification, care and managing breast cancer and related risks in people with a family history of breast cancer (NICE), p CG164, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164 (accessed 12 Jan 2017).
  4. 4.↵
    1. Burton H,
    2. Chowdhury S,
    3. Dent T,
    4. et al.
    (2013) Public health implications from COGS and potential for risk stratification and screening. Nature Genetics 45(4):349–351.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Evans WRH,
    2. Rafi I
    (2016) Br J Gen Pract, Rare diseases in general practice: recognising the zebras among the horses. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X687625.
  6. 6.↵
    1. Walter FM,
    2. Emery J,
    3. Burton H
    (2014) Br J Gen Pract, Chronic disease prevention in primary care: how and when will genomics impact? DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp14X680401.
  7. 7.↵
    1. Wilke RA,
    2. Ramsey LB,
    3. Johnson SG,
    4. et al.
    (2012) The clinical pharmacogenomics implementation consortium: CPIC guideline for SLCO1B1 and simvastatin-induced myopathy. Clin Pharmacol Ther 92(1):112–117.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Public Health Genomics Foundation project team
    (2014) Realising Genomics in Clinical Practice (PHG Foundation), http://www.phgfoundation.org/file/16426 (accessed 20 Dec 2016).
  9. 9.↵
    1. NHS England
    (2015) Personalised Medicine Strategy. Board paper (NHS England), https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/item5-board-29-09-15.pdf (accessed 20 Dec 2016).
  10. 10.↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    (2008) Familial Hypercholesterolaemia: identification and management (NICE), p CG71, https://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG71 (accessed 12 Jan 2017).
  11. 11.↵
    1. Royal College of General Practitioners
    (2015) RCGP Curriculum 3 02 Genetics in primary care (RCGP), http://www.rcgp.org.uk/training-exams/gp-curriculum-overview/online-curriculum/applying-clinical-knowledge-section-1/3-02-genetics-in-primary-care.aspx (accessed 20 Dec 2016).
  12. 12.↵
    1. NHS Health Education England
    (2016) Genomics Education Programme (NHS HEE), https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/ (accessed 20 Dec 2016).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 67 (655)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 67, Issue 655
February 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Genomics in routine clinical care: what does this mean for primary care?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Genomics in routine clinical care: what does this mean for primary care?
Judith Hayward, Michelle Bishop, Imran Rafi, Val Davison
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (655): 58-59. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17X688945

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Genomics in routine clinical care: what does this mean for primary care?
Judith Hayward, Michelle Bishop, Imran Rafi, Val Davison
British Journal of General Practice 2017; 67 (655): 58-59. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17X688945
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • CANCER
    • RARE DISEASE
    • OTHER COMMON COMPLEX DISEASE AND PHARMACOGENOMICS
    • PRACTICAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
    • EDUCATION AND TRAINING
    • SUMMARY
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Learning disability registers: known unknowns and unknown unknowns
  • Charging for NHS care and its impact on maternal health
  • Helping GPs to diagnose children’s cancer
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2021 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242