Laboratory genetic counseling is becoming increasingly common as a result of increased laboratory services and genetic testing menus, as well as growing job responsibilities. Christian et al. (2012) provided the first quantitative data regarding the roles of the laboratory‐based genetic counselor (LBGC) finding that two of the most prevalent roles are as customer liaisons and communicators of test results. The goal of the present study was to further delineate the role of the LBGC by addressing specific tasks that LBGCs are involved with on a day‐to‐day basis. A survey was designed to expand upon themes identified in the Christian et al. (2012) study by querying specific tasks performed in several categories of potential LBGC job duties. An invitation for LBGCs to participate was distributed via email to the membership of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) and the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors (CAGC). We identified 121 genetic counselors who primarily work in the laboratory setting or whose job role includes a laboratory component. Almost all respondents performed customer liaison/case coordination (95 %), and interpretation and result reporting (88 %). The most frequently performed tasks within these categories involved addressing questions from clients, making phone calls with genetic testing results, obtaining clinical or family history information for results interpretation, and composing case‐specific interpretations for unique results and/or obtaining literature references to support interpretations. The study results also point to trends of expanding roles in sales and marketing, variant interpretation and management responsibilities. Results of this study may be useful to further define the full scope of practice of LBGCs, aid in the development of new LBGC positions and expand current positions to include roles related to test development, research, and student supervision. It may also aid in curriculum updates for training programs to increase exposure to LBGC roles.
7 March 2023 in Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate comorbidity prevalence and patterns in childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) and their relationship to severity. Method: In this retroactive cross-sectional study, medical records for 375 children with CAS ( Mage = 4;9 [years;months], SD = 2;9) were examined for comorbid conditions. The total number of comorbid conditions and the number of communication-related comorbidities were regressed on CAS severity as rated by speech-language pathologists during diagnosis. The relationship between CAS severity and the presence of four common comorbid conditions was also examined using ordinal or multinomial regressions. Results: Overall, 83 children were classified with mild CAS; 35, with moderate CAS; and 257, with severe CAS. Only one child had no comorbidities. The average number of comorbid conditions was 8.4 ( SD = 3.4), and the average number of communication-related comorbidities was 5.6 ( SD = 2.2). Over 95% of children had comorbid expressive language impairment. Children with comorbid intellectual disability (78.1%), receptive language impairment (72.5%), and nonspeech apraxia (37.3%; including limb, nonspeech oromotor, and oculomotor apraxia) were significantly more likely to have severe CAS than children without these comorbidities. However, children with comorbid autism spectrum disorder (33.6%) were no more likely to have severe CAS than children without autism. Conclusions: Comorbidity appears to be the rule, rather than the exception, for children with CAS. Comorbid intellectual disability, receptive language impairment, and nonspeech apraxia confer additional risk for more severe forms of CAS. Findings are limited by being from a convenience sample of participants but inform future models of comorbidity. Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.22096622
1 April 2015 in Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Background: Genomics enables individualized diagnosis and treatment, but large challenges remain to functionally interpret rare variants. To date, only one causative variant has been described for KCNK9 imprinting syndrome (KIS). The genotypic and phenotypic spectrum of KIS has yet to be described and the precise mechanism of disease fully understood. Methods: This study discovers mechanisms underlying KCNK9 imprinting syndrome (KIS) by describing 15 novel KCNK9 alterations from 47 KIS-affected individuals. We use clinical genetics and computer-assisted facial phenotyping to describe the phenotypic spectrum of KIS. We then interrogate the functional effects of the variants in the encoded TASK3 channel using sequence-based analysis, 3D molecular mechanic and dynamic protein modeling, and in vitro electrophysiological and functional methodologies. Results: We describe the broader genetic and phenotypic variability for KIS in a cohort of individuals identifying an additional mutational hotspot at p.Arg131 and demonstrating the common features of this neurodevelopmental disorder to include motor and speech delay, intellectual disability, early feeding difficulties, muscular hypotonia, behavioral abnormalities, and dysmorphic features. The computational protein modeling and in vitro electrophysiological studies discover variability of the impact of KCNK9 variants on TASK3 channel function identifying variants causing gain and others causing loss of conductance. The most consistent functional impact of KCNK9 genetic variants, however, was altered channel regulation. Conclusions: This study extends our understanding of KIS mechanisms demonstrating its complex etiology including gain and loss of channel function and consistent loss of channel regulation. These data are rapidly applicable to diagnostic strategies, as KIS is not identifiable from clinical features alone and thus should be molecularly diagnosed. Furthermore, our data suggests unique therapeutic strategies may be needed to address the specific functional consequences of KCNK9 variation on channel function and regulation.