CETT: Collaboration Education and Test Translation Program
Home About Us Contact Us CETTRack Login


Frequently Asked Questions Application Process Resources and Education
Application Instructions
Guidelines for Submitting Funding Requests

Click here to download a Microsoft Word version of this document.


CETT Program Application Instructions

The CETT Program released the revised Application and Instructions in July 2007. Collaborative Groups are encouraged to use the new application immediately. Applications conforming to previous versions should not be submitted after September 1, 2007.

We strongly encourage all applicants to contact Andy Faucett, CETT Program Coordinator (info@CETTProgram.org or 404-727-4510), early in the process to obtain assistance as the application is developed.  The CETT Program Coordinator is available to provide an early review of individual application sections to a Collaborative Group seeking additional guidance or to address other issues throughout the application process.

Collaborative Groups submitting applications which are not DNA sequence-based assays or applications which have multiple testing platforms must contact the CETT Program Coordinator for guidance beyond the supplemental instructions provided in this document. The letters in the instructions refer to the letters in the application document.

1. Identify the Collaborative Group

Each Collaborative Group is expected to include the following:

  • CLIA-approved laboratory with experience in the proposed testing methodology and a commitment to rare disease testing. Laboratories currently performing low volume rare disease tests have found that the issues in rare disease testing are different. See question 11 if this is the first rare disease test for the laboratory. 
  • Clinical laboratory genetic counselor.
  • Researcher experienced in the proposed test.
  • Clinician knowledgeable in the condition to assist with test ordering and test result interpretation.
  • Advocate group representative or an individual if a formal group does not exist.

Other genetic counselors may be included in the application.  There may be multiple individuals for each role (e.g. researchers, clinicians, and patient advocates).  Collaborative Groups that need additional assistance identifying members for the requested roles should contact the CETT Program Coordinator for further assistance.

2. Letters of commitment and roles of collaborative group members

a.    In the letters of collaboration, specify the actual work plan and the role for each member.  Consider the following guidance in your answers: What will the role of the patient advocate group be in the project? Do they have adequate staffing? What is the relationship between the clinical laboratory and the research laboratory? How will they work together on new findings, etc? Who will provide clinical support to referring clinicians and patients, medical geneticist, genetic counselors, others? Include who initiated the group and the individuals’ perspective on the need for testing.

b.    Describe the plan for regular communication between all members of the Collaborative Group.  Regular communication among the laboratory, researcher, and advocate is encouraged during the application process and once the test is available.

Include copies as PDFs with an electronic application or mail signed copies to the CETT Program Coordinator.

NOTE: Joint Letters of Collaboration are no longer accepted per the Review Board.

4. Genes

b.   For sequenced-based molecular tests, complete Table 2. How well does the proposed test identify mutations in the gene?  By completing Table 2, estimate the power of the approach to detect the various types of mutations in that gene.

For non-sequence-based tests, provide the proposed method, the target tested for, the proportion of disease attributed to the test target, and the detection of the target using the proposed method.

5. Test methods

Although the majority of applications to date rely on DNA sequencing, the CETT Program accepts applications for any appropriate testing platform. Contact Andy Faucett, CETT Program Coordinator, for further guidance on non-molecular testing platforms.

a.    Identify the test type(s) and describe in detail the methods to be used in the proposed test.  Why was this method chosen? How does it compare with other methods? If more than one test method is necessary to achieve the detection rate included in Table 2, include information on each of the methods.

b.    For sequenced-based tests:

v.    Have large deletions been looked for and/or reported for this gene?  Cite methods used to identify large deletions, their frequency, and sources for this information. How will your proposed testing scheme assess large deletions?  How will you consider UPD and single or multiple exon deletions in test result interpretation? Consider addressing apparent homozygosity in autosomal dominant and recessive disorders.

e.    For example, assume that 100 samples that meet your minimum eligibility criteria are submitted to the laboratory. In the flow sheet, take these 100 samples through your testing plan and include the anticipated outcome (i.e., number of positive, negative, and indeterminate test results).  From what source or reference is this estimate derived?

g.    If the proposed test targets specific findings or is limited to specific regions of the gene/chromosome, how will new findings be added to expand the testing strategy? For example, if the researcher identifies a mutation in exon 10 of the gene, and the proposed test sequences only exons 4-8, how will the clinical laboratory incorporate this new information into the proposed test? For molecular tests, describe why whole gene sequencing is or is not needed.

6. Projected cost of test setup, test price, and test turn-around time

For sequence based tests, the CETT Program determined that $1,000 per amplicon was a reasonable reference cost for test translation. For non-sequencing based tests, contact the CETT Program Coordinator before completing this section. The CETT Program does not fund indirect costs;if indirect costs are required by the applicant’s institution, they should be included in the projected cost of test setup. 

a.    Prepare a translation budget that includes materials, labor and other costs associated with test translation, not test development. Equipment costs over $500 cannot be included. The CETT Program funding is intended to supplement test translation funding provided by the clinical laboratory and/or patient advocacy organization. Indicate the laboratory’s contribution for test translation. Outline other promised or potential sources of funding.

7. Current diagnostic pathway and proposed diagnostic pathway

When answering these questions, assume that the reviewer is not familiar with the current diagnostic criteria and pathway.  Describe the diagnostic criteria and pathway in detail. It is helpful to use the same format when presenting the current and proposed diagnostic pathways.  Some applicant teams have indicated that PowerPoint is a user-friendly program for creating flow diagrams.  Requested elements of the diagnostic & test pathways should be discussed in the written response as well as in the flow diagrams.

a.    Are the diagnostic criteria published?  Provide the reference. If they are not published or if the published criteria are out of date, explain the basis of the current diagnostic criteria.

c.   For the proposed diagnostic pathway that includes the new test discuss if the pathway may change once additional data are collected.

d.    Discuss if the proposed testing will be tiered (i.e., done in stages) and how the ordering for each subsequent test will be accomplished.  Will additional testing be reflexive or will the ordering physician need to order the next tier of the test?

c.    If more than one test method is necessary to achieve the detection rate included in Table 2, identify each of the methods in the flow diagram for the proposed diagnostic pathway.

e.    This information may be used to justify testing to payers.


8. Test result interpretation

b.    Refer to the CETT Program guidelines for evaluation of indeterminate results. Indicate if the clinical laboratory’s process for evaluating VOUS has been previously reviewed and approved by the CETT Program. If yes, indicate if you anticipate any changes specific to this test.   

c.    What role will the researcher play in evaluating VOUS or other indeterminate results?  Is there a functional assay to evaluate VOUS?  If family studies are needed to evaluate novel mutations and/or VOUS, will the family members be charged?

h.    For applications that use sequence-based molecular testing:

iii.    Can carriers for an autosomal recessive disorder or X-linked disorder be reliably detected using the proposed test methods? Discuss testing for both the sibling of an affected individual and for the spouse/partner of a known carrier.

9. Test result reports

a.    Provide a draft report for each of the result types. Each report should address the critical elements in the CETT Program Result Report Template.  The Report Templates and additional information in the PowerPoint presentation on laboratory reports are located on the CETT Program website. If your institution has guidelines or restrictions on test result report format, please describe those in this section.

10. References  

Provide a brief summary of the active research on this condition. Highlight important findings in the selected references. Include data that expand understanding of expected test results or test interpretations. Additional preprints and unpublished data that expand the understanding of identified mutations are appreciated.

11. Technical experience of the clinical laboratory in diagnostic testing

If this is the first rare disease test to be performed by the clinical laboratory, contact Dr. Suzanne Hart (shart@mail.nih.gov) for guidelines to be addressed in the application.

i.    Explain the laboratory experience in assay validation. For further information, refer to the PowerPoint available on the CETT Program website.

12.  Potential impact of the test on health

a.    A clinical laboratory usually offers testing in all of the listed scenarios. For each NO response, justify your reasoning for not offering testing in that particular scenario.

iii.    Partners of known carriers includes: a) new partners of obligate carrier parents, and b) partners of relatives of a proband, who are at risk to be a carrier.  If you are providing carrier testing for partners of known carriers (2) but not for general population screening, describe whether data are available to explain this difference.

b.    How will the proposed test results potentially change patient care? This might include health care management, need for additional tests, impact on the time-to-diagnosis (medical odyssey),  and/or recurrence risk counseling? Describe any impact on age of diagnosis  Are there therapies to reduce morbidity and/or mortality?   If yes, describe.  Describe how a laboratory representative or genetic counselor would justify use of the test to a clinician and to a payer.

13.  Laboratory-Clinical interface

a. b. Who in the clinical laboratory will respond to clinician inquiries about test ordering, test report interpretation, test cost and reimbursement, test methods and sensitivity, who to test, and who to test first, etc? Who will respond to patient inquiries? If not provided elsewhere, state the name and certification of these individuals.

c.   How will the researcher and advocate group be involved in laboratory-clinical interface?  How will activities with the researcher or research laboratory be coordinated? Will there be regular communication between all members of the Collaborative Group?


14. Educational materials

CETT Program policy requires that the clinical laboratory be an information source for all potential consumers of the proposed test. Most laboratories have experience providing educational materials for genetic clinicians, but limited experience developing educational materials for general clinicians, patients and families. Since clinical tests developed using the CETT Program are initially offered by one laboratory, there are limited or no other information resources. The laboratory must be willing to discuss testing with clinicians, patients, and families by telephone and/or email.

The CETT Program website has a number of resources to assist in the development of appropriate educational materials. A blank template for each of the target audiences with points and questions to consider is available to help guide development.  Also posted to the CETT Program website are examples of educational materials that have been reviewed by the CETT Program. Finally, the Power Point slides from the CETT Review Board Meeting (March 6-7, 2007) are posted and discuss the development of educational materials and the types information that should be included.

In developing initial drafts of educational materials for a new test, you may start by “cutting and pasting” from the examples provided. It is important to develop educational materials for patients and families with a reading level suitable for families just learning about the condition. In general the synopsis (abstract) should be written at a 6th to 8th grade level and additional sections should be written at or below the 8th to 10th grade reading level. It is anticipated that each test (condition) will have specific issues that may need to be highlighted. Each laboratory is encouraged to use their own format, style and graphics to identify the educational materials as coming from their own institution.

The CETT Program, upon request, provides $1,000 per application to assist with the development of educational materials. These funds will be included in the test development award. The Collaborative Group should decide how the funds will be distributed once received.

The CETT Program realizes that the test translation and educational material development timelines will be different for each application. The Collaborative Group is encouraged to submit draft educational materials with the application. Option B allows for submission of these after evaluation but well before the test in introduced. In general Option B should be avoided if the clinical laboratory has been working on test development during the application process and anticipates that the test will be available shortly after approval.

The CETT Program Coordinator and CETT Program Education Coordinator are available to assist with the development of educational materials, the distribution plan and the plan to announce the test. You are encouraged to contact the CETT Program Staff before, during and after the application process. All educational materials MUST BE REVIEWED AND POSTED before the test is announced.

15. Data collection plan

The CETT Program has created several avenues of support to assist Collaborative Groups in collecting and storing data and sharing de-identified information.  The CETT Program partners with the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) which will assist each applicant in developing their data collection plan to address the following issues:

Each CETT Program-sponsored test must have a one-page clinical form for the clinician requesting the test to complete at the time the patient’s sample is submitted.  The primary purpose of these clinical data is to aid the clinical testing laboratory in interpretation of test results. However, it is further recognized that newly available clinical genetic tests for rare genetic disorders present unique opportunities.  In most cases, the first-time clinical availability of a test may result in the accumulation of a significant knowledge base about the genetic and clinical scope and breadth of the disorder as more affected individuals are identified.   Therefore, the CETT program seeks to leverage the individual genotype/phenotype data for each test it supports by their inclusion in the NCBI dbGaP databases, in the hope that better understanding will lead to better diagnosis and treatment of these disorders.  The timing will be based on the mutually agreeable time of the CETT Program Collaborative Group & CETT Program Staff.

CETT Program applicants must contact NCBI (cett@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) early in the application process to coordinate data collection tasks. NCBI will:

·         Assist CETT Program Collaborative Groups with the initial design of their collection plan.

·         Create user-friendly electronic clinical data forms for each project in order to facilitate data collection, storage and sharing.

·         Organize and store genotype and clinical data collected from individuals evaluated by their new test.

·         Discuss and help applicants develop individualized approaches to creating publicly accessible data that may aid understanding about the disorder and its treatments.

**Additional potential partnerships and examples of rare disease databases will be provided on an ongoing basis to the CETT Program Collaborative Groups.

16. GeneReview

The GeneReview should be completed within 12 months of funding. Refer to the FAQs on the CETT Program website for the GeneReview outline or see Author Instructions on the GeneTests website (www.genetests.org) – select “About GeneTests” on the navigation bar.  Applicants should contact Bonnie Pagon (bpagon@u.washington.edu) early in the application process. The Collaborative Group is responsible for ensuring that a GeneReview is completed; however, recruitment of experts outside the Collaborative Group as authors is welcome.

18. Annual Report

The Collaborative Group is required to submit a report to the CETT Program annually for a total of 5 years. Typically, the clinical laboratory is the entity responsible for coordinating the annual report and submitting the information to the CETT Program Coordinator. Reports should be submitted from the date the test was approved for translation by the CETT Program Review Board. Contact the CETT Program Coordinator for current submission guidelines and required elements. Currently report elements should include:

·         Volume of tests including indication for test (diagnostic, carrier, prenatal, etc.)

·         Number of tests ordered by provider type (geneticist, nongenetic health care provider)

·         Any trends noted in test ordering

·         Number of positive, negative, and indeterminate results

·         Number of mutations detected and types of mutations

·         Detection rate observed in tested samples

·         Number of patients/families referred to researcher for further study and if so, was it helpful to the interpretation

·         Any unexpected issues observed

·         Discuss plans, if any, to change the testing paradigm

·         Changes in laboratory staff and Collaborative Group participation

·         Other specific reports indicated in the original application, as applicable

·         Summary of feedback received by the laboratory, advocate, and researcher

*Mail address: Andy Faucett, Department of Human Genetics, Emory University School of Medicine, 615 Michael Street Suite 301, Atlanta, GA 30322

Email Andy Faucett with questions.


Updated: June, 2007



Application page
Department of Health & Human Services Home | About Us | Contact Us National Institutes of Health