The low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) plays a pivotal role in clearing atherogenic circulating low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Here we show that the COMMD/CCDC22/CCDC93 (CCC) and the Wiskott–Aldrich syndrome protein and SCAR homologue (WASH) complexes are both crucial for endosomal sorting of LDLR and for its function. We find that patients with X-linked intellectual disability caused by mutations in CCDC22 are hypercholesterolaemic, and that COMMD1-deficient dogs and liver-specific Commd1 knockout mice have elevated plasma LDL cholesterol levels. Furthermore, Commd1 depletion results in mislocalization of LDLR, accompanied by decreased LDL uptake. Increased total plasma cholesterol levels are also seen in hepatic COMMD9-deficient mice. Inactivation of the CCC-associated WASH complex causes LDLR mislocalization, increased lysosomal degradation of LDLR and impaired LDL uptake. Furthermore, a mutation in the WASH component KIAA0196 (strumpellin) is associated with hypercholesterolaemia in humans. Altogether, this study provides valuable insights into the mechanisms regulating cholesterol homeostasis and LDLR trafficking.

The introduction of diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) is changing the scope of practice for clinical geneticists. Many large institutions are making a significant investment in infrastructure and technology, allowing clinicians to access CGES, especially as health-care coverage begins to extend to clinically indicated genomic sequencing-based tests. Translating and realizing the comprehensive clinical benefits of genomic medicine remain a key challenge for the current and future care of patients. With the increasing application of CGES, it is necessary for geneticists and other health-care providers to understand its benefits and limitations in order to interpret the clinical relevance of genomic variants identified in the context of health and disease. New, collaborative working relationships with specialists across diverse disciplines (e.g., clinicians, laboratorians, bioinformaticians) will undoubtedly be key attributes of the future practice of clinical genetics and may serve as an example for other specialties in medicine. These new skills and relationships will also inform the development of the future model of clinical genetics training curricula. To address the evolving role of the clinical geneticist in the rapidly changing climate of genomic medicine, two Clinical Genetics Think Tank meetings were held that brought together physicians, laboratorians, scientists, genetic counselors, trainees, and patients with experience in clinical genetics, genetic diagnostics, and genetics education. This article provides recommendations that will guide the integration of genomics into clinical practice. Genet Med 18 11, 1075–1084.

An abundance of qualitative research is being conducted within the genetic counseling field. As this area of research expands, many within our community are “learning through doing”, an approach which is practical, but may lack theoretical grounding. This can result in study outputs that do not have the sort of utility for informing clinical practice that is the hallmark of excellent clinical qualitative research. Furthermore, our alignment as a discipline within the health sciences, which still tends to favor quantitative approaches, means that we may often be obliged to justify the use of qualitative methodologies, especially when we intend to use the findings for informing clinical practice. We aim to address these issues by providing guidance about how we, individually and collectively, might think about what excellent qualitative research can look like in our field. In addition to providing information and resources about current best‐practices, we discuss how quality can be ensured and evaluated. We seek to legitimize the idea of developing a philosophy of research in pursuit of establishing genetic counseling as an academic discipline. We argue that the principles, ethics, values, and practices of genetic counseling are sufficiently unique that establishing a discipline‐specific qualitative research framework is not only warranted, but essential. Ultimately, we hope that this paper can serve as a launching point from which additional discussion about qualitative research can emanate as we strive towards the elevation of this form of inquiry in our field.