There has been little discussion of the way genomic research results should be returned and how to obtain informed consent for this. We systematically searched the empirical literature, identifying 63 articles exploring stakeholder perspectives on processes for obtaining informed consent about return of results and/or result delivery. Participants, patients and members of the public generally felt they should choose which results are returned to them and how, ranging from direct (face-to-face, telephone) to indirect (letters, emails, web-based delivery) communication. Professionals identified inadequacies in result delivery processes in the research context. Our findings have important implications for ensuring participants are supported in deciding which results they wish to receive or, if no choice is offered, preparing them for potential research outcomes.

A challenge in returning genomic test results to research participants is how best to communicate complex and clinically nuanced findings to participants in a manner that is scalable to the large numbers of participants enrolled. The purpose of this study was to examine the features of genetic results letters produced at each Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE3) Network site to assess their readability and content. Letters were collected from each site, and a qualitative analysis of letter content and a quantitative analysis of readability statistics were performed. Because letters were produced independently at each eMERGE site, significant heterogeneity in readability and content was found. The content of letters varied widely from a baseline of notifying participants that results existed to more detailed information about positive or negative results, as well as materials for sharing with family members. Most letters were significantly above the Centers for Disease Control-suggested reading level for health communication. While continued effort should be applied to make letters easier to understand, the ongoing challenge of explaining complex genomic information, the implications of negative test results, and the uncertainty that comes with some types of test and result makes simplifying letter text challenging.

The increasing use of biomarker tests for Alzheimer\'s disease (AD) in research and, to a much lesser extent, specialty care settings has led to questions concerning how individuals may react to learning of their AD biomarker status in the absence of a cure or preventative treatment. The purpose of this chapter is to systematically review the published evidence regarding amyloid imaging results disclosure and to synthesize findings across studies with a focus on the psychological, social, and behavioral outcomes of such results disclosure. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched six electronic databases, screened 265 articles, and reviewed seven publications in depth. Most studies were descriptive in nature and lack control groups. However, as a group, these articles provide important early insights into the psychological safety of disclosing amyloid imaging results to cognitively normal persons, and highlight the need for rigorously designed studies that address social and behavioral outcomes and extend to symptomatic populations.

Effective use of genetic and genomic data in cancer prevention and treatment depends on adequate communication with patients and the public. Although relevant empirical work has emerged, the scope and outcomes of this communication research have not been characterized. We conducted a comprehensive scoping review of recent published research (2010-2017) on communication of cancer-related genetic and genomic testing (CGT) information. Searches in six databases revealed 9243 unique records; 513 papers were included. Most papers utilized an observational quantitative design; fewer utilized an experimental design. More attention has been paid to outcomes of CGT results disclosure than to decision making regarding CGT uptake or the process of results disclosure. Psychosocial outcomes were most common across studies. This literature has a strong focus on BRCA1/2, with few papers focused on Lynch syndrome or next-generation technologies. Women, Caucasians, older adults, and those of higher socioeconomic status were overrepresented. Research gaps identified include the need for studies on the process of CGT communication; examining behavioral, decision making, and communication outcomes; and inclusion of diverse populations. Addressing these gaps can help improve the use of genomics in cancer control and reduce disparities in access to and use of CGT.

Genomic information will increasingly be used to aid in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of disease. Several national initiatives are paving the way for this new reality, while also promoting new models of participant-engaged research. We compare the opinions of research participants in a cancer registry, human genetic researchers, and institutional review board (IRB) professionals about the return of individual-level genetic results (ROR).
Online surveys were administered to participants in a cancer registry (n = 450) and overlapping questions were compared to our previous online national surveys of human genetic researchers (n = 351) and IRB professionals (n = 208).
The majority of respondents agreed that researchers have an obligation to return individual results when they would affect a participant\'s health. While 77% of registry participants favored ROR if the researcher feels the participant might be interested in the results, only 30% of the IRB professionals and 25% of the genetic researchers agreed with this statement.
Significant differences emerged between the stakeholder groups in several ROR scenarios. Policies that are acceptable to participants, researchers and IRBs, and that ensure human subject protections and facilitate research are needed.

Observational genome-wide association studies require large sample sizes. Evaluating the interplay between genomic, environmental, and lifestyle factors can require even larger sample sizes. The All of Us Research Program will recruit 1 million participants to facilitate research on genomic, environmental, and lifestyle factors. Integrating participant preferences into the research process is a new paradigm and a necessary component of the All of Us Research Program. The purpose of the study is to summarize quantitative studies of participant preferences related to participation in observational genomic research studies, starting with consent through return of results. Integrating this information into the conduct of genomic studies may benefit participants, and improve participant satisfaction, recruitment, and retention. We conducted a systematic review of the literature regarding participant views related to reconsent and broad consent, use of de-identified data, contribution of data to a biorepository, risk of identification, return of individual genetic results, and motivation for participation in genomic studies. Twenty-three articles met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Study results found that most participants support broad consent; however, significant differences related to reconsent preferences have been shown by gender and age. Most participants support the return of individual genomic results and do not feel it is necessary to maintain a link to their de-identified data. Reasons given for joining research studies varied by population source. These findings, in addition to the knowledge that participants are more accepting of broad informed consent methods when the rationale is explained, can assist in developing guidelines for future observational genomic research.