Waltman, Lindsey

Abstract Isolated trisomy 2 in hematopoietic malignancies is rare, having only been reported in eight cases in the literature. Of these cases, the majority are older male patients (7/8) ranging in age from 64 to 84 years. The underlying hematologic malignancies include: myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), refractory anemia (RA) subtype; MDS, RA with excess blasts (RAEB-II) subtype; MDS, RAEB in transformation (RAEB-t); chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML-t) in transformation; MDS transformed into AML; acute monoblastic and monocytic leukemia (AMoL; FAB M5); and AML in relapse. The molecular pathogenesis and prognostic significance of isolated trisomy 2 remains unknown due to the small number of reported cases. Herein, we report 11 cases of isolated trisomy 2 in hematologic disorders seen in the Mayo Clinic Cytogenetics laboratory from 1996-2012. The majority of patients were older males (7/11) ranging in age from 63 to 93 years. The underlying bone marrow pathologic diagnoses include: hypercellular bone marrow without diagnostic features of malignancy (cases 1 and 2); MDS, refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia (RCMD) subtype (cases 3 and 4); RAEB-1 (cases 5 and 6); long-standing history of primary myelofibrosis now with 7% bone marrow blasts (case 7); acute myeloid leukemia (AML), not otherwise specified (cases 8 and 9); AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (cases 10 and 11). Trisomy 2 has been suggested to represent an age-related phenomenon as it is seen predominantly in older individuals demonstrating this abnormality. Our data suggests that this could be a possible explanation since all of the eleven cases were ages 63 and over. Based on the limited clinical information in our study, it appears that isolated trisomy 2 harbors little prognostic significance and that, rather, the prognostic significance is driven by the underlying pathologic diagnosis. For example, 3 of the 4 AML cases and the case of PMF with increasing bone marrow blasts survived only 7, 8, 6 weeks and 21 weeks post bone marrow biopsy/cytogenetic evaluation, respectively. Although our study only has two cases that lack diagnostic features of malignancy, one of these cases survived 10 years following the identification of the cytogenetic abnormality. Therefore, trisomy 2 as a sole abnormality should not be considered as definitive evidence for MDS in the absence of diagnostic morphological criteria (similar to trisomy 8 and 20q deletion). Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

AbstractEthical dilemmas are encountered commonly in the setting of the clinical genetic testing laboratory due to the complexity of genetic testing and the number of relevant stakeholders involved in the genetic testing process. Based on their clinical training and role within the laboratory, genetic counselors are uniquely equipped to identify and facilitate management of ethical dilemmas. This paper reviews the historical context of ethical theory and its application to the field of genetic counseling. Theoretical and applied ethics are explored in the context of dilemmas arising in the laboratory setting, with a focus on the role of the laboratory genetic counselor in managing ethical dilemmas. Two illustrative case examples are provided.

AbstractLaboratory 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.