Interoperable genetic lab test reports: mapping key data elements to HL7 FHIR specifications and professional reporting guidelines

OBJECTIVE In many cases, genetic testing labs provide their test reports as portable document format files or scanned images, which limits the availability of the contained information to advanced informatics solutions, such as automated clinical decision support systems. One of the promising standards that aims to address this limitation is Health Level Seven International (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources Clinical Genomics Implementation Guide-Release 1 (FHIR CG IG STU1). This study aims to identify various data content of some genetic lab test reports and map them to FHIR CG IG specification to assess its coverage and to provide some suggestions for standard development and implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed sample reports of 4 genetic tests and relevant professional reporting guidelines to identify their key data elements (KDEs) that were then mapped to FHIR CG IG. RESULTS We identified 36 common KDEs among the analyzed genetic test reports, in addition to other unique KDEs for each genetic test. Relevant suggestions were made to guide the standard implementation and development. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The FHIR CG IG covers the majority of the identified KDEs. However, we suggested some FHIR extensions that might better represent some KDEs. These extensions may be relevant to FHIR implementations or future FHIR updates.The FHIR CG IG is an excellent step toward the interoperability of genetic lab test reports. However, it is a work-in-progress that needs informative and continuous input from the clinical genetics' community, specifically professional organizations, systems implementers, and genetic knowledgebase providers.

[1]  Alex H. Wagner,et al.  FHIR Genomics: enabling standardization for precision medicine use cases , 2020, npj Genomic Medicine.

[2]  H. Kearney,et al.  Section E9 of the American College of Medical Genetics technical standards and guidelines: Fluorescence in situ hybridization , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[3]  S. South,et al.  American College of Medical Genetics recommendations for the design and performance expectations for clinical genomic copy number microarrays intended for use in the postnatal setting for detection of constitutional abnormalities , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[4]  Bale,et al.  Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[5]  Ros Hastings,et al.  European guidelines for constitutional cytogenomic analysis , 2018, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[6]  S. South,et al.  American College of Medical Genetics standards and guidelines for interpretation and reporting of postnatal constitutional copy number variants , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[7]  Marc S. Williams,et al.  The interface of genomic information with the electronic health record: a points to consider statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) , 2020, Genetics in Medicine.

[8]  Acmg Board Of Directors.  Laboratory and clinical genomic data sharing is crucial to improving genetic health care: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[9]  Katrina Rack,et al.  Cytogenetic Nomenclature and Reporting. , 2017, Methods in molecular biology.

[10]  S. South,et al.  Technical standards for the interpretation and reporting of constitutional copy number variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) , 2019, Genetics in Medicine.

[11]  Borut Peterlin,et al.  Recommendations for reporting results of diagnostic genetic testing (biochemical, cytogenetic and molecular genetic) , 2013, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[12]  Gil Alterovitz,et al.  SMART on FHIR Genomics: facilitating standardized clinico-genomic apps , 2015, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[13]  H. Kearney,et al.  American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics: standards and guidelines for documenting suspected consanguinity as an incidental finding of genomic testing , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[14]  N. Heerema,et al.  Section E6.1–6.4 of the ACMG technical standards and guidelines: chromosome studies of neoplastic blood and bone marrow–acquired chromosomal abnormalities , 2016, Genetics in Medicine.

[15]  Simon M. Lin,et al.  Clinical exome sequencing reports: current informatics practice and future opportunities , 2017, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..