Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is a new means of obtaining genetic testing outside of a traditional clinical setting. This study assesses genetic counselors’ experience, knowledge, and beliefs regarding direct-to-consumer genetic testing for tests that would currently be offered in genetics clinics.
Members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors completed a web-administered survey in February 2008.
Response rate was 36%; the final data analysis included 312 respondents. Eighty-three percent of respondents had two or fewer inquiries about direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and 14% had received requests for test interpretation or discussion. Respondents believed that genetic counselors have a professional obligation to be knowledgeable about direct-to-consumer genetic testing (55%) and interpret results (48%). Fifty-one percent of respondents thought genetic testing should be limited to a clinical setting; 56% agreed direct-to-consumer genetic testing is acceptable if genetic counseling is provided. More than 70% of respondents would definitely or possibly consider direct-to-consumer testing for patients who (1) have concerns about genetic discrimination, (2) want anonymous testing, or (3) have geographic constraints.
Results indicate that genetic counselors have limited patient experiences with direct-to-consumer genetic testing and are cautiously considering if and under what circumstances this approach should be used
Background: The increased availability of genetic tests for common, complex diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), raises questions about what people are willing to pay for these services. Methods: We studied willingness-to-pay for genetic testing in a study of AD risk assessment that included APOE genotype disclosure among 276 first-degree relatives of persons with AD. Results: Seventy-one percent reported that they would ask for such testing from their doctor if it were covered by health insurance, and 60% would ask for it even if it required self-pay. Forty-one percent were willing to pay more than $100 for testing, and more than half would have been willing to pay for the test out of pocket. Participants who learned that they were APOE ɛ4 positive and those who had higher education were less likely to want testing if covered by insurance, possibly to avoid discrimination. Conclusion: This is the first report to examine willingness to pay for susceptibility genetic testing in a sample of participants who had actually undergone such testing. These findings reveal that some participants find valuable personal utility in genetic risk information even when such information does not have proven clinical utility.
The intake of dietary fatty acids is highly correlated with the risk of various cancers. Linoleic acid (LA) is the most abundant polyunsaturated fat in the western diet, but the mechanism(s) by fatty acids such as LA modulate cancer cells is unclear. In this study, we examined the role of LA in various steps in gastric cancer progression.
The difference in gene expression between LA-treated and untreated OCUM-2MD3 gastric carcinoma cells was examined by mRNA differential display. The involvement of candidate genes was examined by oligo- and plasmid-mediated RNA interference. Biological functions of several of these genes were examined using in vitro assays for invasion, angiogenesis, apoptosis, cell viability, and matrix digestion. Angiogenesis in vivo was measured by CD-31 immunohistochemistry and microvessel density scoring.
LA enhanced the plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) mRNA and protein expression, which are controlled by PAI-1 mRNA-binding protein. LA-stimulated invasion depended on PAI-1. LA also enhanced angiogenesis by suppression of angiostatin, also through PAI-1. LA did not alter cell growth in culture, but increased dietary LA-enhanced tumour growth in an animal model.
Our findings suggest that dietary LA impacts multiple steps in cancer invasion and angiogenesis, and that reducing LA in the diet may help slow cancer progression.
gastric carcinoma; linoleic acid; plasminogen activator inhibitor 1; angiostatin; invasion
Susceptibility testing for common, complex adult-onset diseases is projected to become more commonplace as the rapid pace of genomic discoveries continues, and evidence regarding the potential benefits and harms of such testing is needed to inform medical practice and health policy. Apolipoprotein E (APOE) testing for risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) provides a paradigm in which to examine the process and impact of disclosing genetic susceptibility for a prevalent, severe and incurable neurological condition. This review summarizes findings from a series of multi-site randomized clinical trials examining psychological and behavioral responses to various methods of genetic risk assessment for AD using APOE disclosure. We discuss challenges involved in disease risk estimation and communication and the extent to which participants comprehend and perceive utility in their genetic risk information. Findings on the psychological impact of test results are presented (e.g., distress), along with data on participants’ health behavior and insurance purchasing responses (e.g., long term care). Finally, we report comparisons of the safety and efficacy of intensive genetic counseling approaches to briefer models that emphasize streamlined processes and educational materials. The implications of these findings for the emerging field of personal genomics are discussed, with directions identified for future research.
Individual cancers harbor a set of genetic aberrations that can be informative for identifying rational therapies currently available or in clinical trials. We implemented a pilot study to explore the practical challenges of applying high-throughput sequencing in clinical oncology. We enrolled patients with advanced or refractory cancer who were eligible for clinical trials. For each patient, we performed whole-genome sequencing of the tumor, targeted whole-exome sequencing of tumor and normal DNA, and transcriptome sequencing (RNA-Seq) of the tumor to identify potentially informative mutations in a clinically relevant time frame of 3 to 4 weeks. With this approach, we detected several classes of cancer mutations including structural rearrangements, copy number alterations, point mutations, and gene expression alterations. A multidisciplinary Sequencing Tumor Board (STB) deliberated on the clinical interpretation of the sequencing results obtained. We tested our sequencing strategy on human prostate cancer xenografts. Next, we enrolled two patients into the clinical protocol and were able to review the results at our STB within 24 days of biopsy. The first patient had metastatic colorectal cancer in which we identified somatic point mutations in NRAS, TP53, AURKA, FAS, and MYH11, plus amplification and overexpression of cyclin-dependent kinase 8 (CDK8). The second patient had malignant melanoma, in which we identified a somatic point mutation in HRAS and a structural rearrangement affecting CDKN2C. The STB identified the CDK8 amplification and Ras mutation as providing a rationale for clinical trials with CDK inhibitors or MEK (mitogenactivated or extracellular signal–regulated protein kinase kinase) and PI3K (phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase) inhibitors, respectively. Integrative high-throughput sequencing of patients with advanced cancer generates a comprehensive, individual mutational landscape to facilitate biomarker-driven clinical trials in oncology.
We reported that Notch-1, a potent breast oncogene, is activated in response to trastuzumab and contributes to trastuzumab resistance in vitro. We sought to determine the preclinical benefit of combining a Notch inhibitor (γ-secretase inhibitor (GSI)) and trastuzumab in both trastuzumab-sensitive and trastuzumab-resistant, ErbB-2-positive, BT474 breast tumours in vivo. We also studied if the combination therapy of lapatinib plus GSI can induce tumour regression of ErbB-2-positive breast cancer.
We generated orthotopic breast tumour xenografts from trastuzumab- or lapatinib-sensitive and trastuzumab-resistant BT474 cells. We investigated the antitumour activities of two distinct GSIs, LY 411 575 and MRK-003, in vivo.
Our findings showed that combining trastuzumab plus a GSI completely prevented (MRK-003 GSI) or significantly reduced (LY 411 575 GSI) breast tumour recurrence post-trastuzumab treatment in sensitive tumours. Moreover, combining lapatinib plus MRK-003 GSI showed significant reduction of tumour growth. Furthermore, a GSI partially reversed trastuzumab resistance in resistant tumours.
Our data suggest that a combined inhibition of Notch and ErbB-2 signalling pathways could decrease recurrence rates for ErbB-2-positive breast tumours and may be beneficial in the treatment of recurrent trastuzumab-resistant disease.
ErbB-2; trastuzumab; Notch-1; GSI; recurrence; resistance
Genetic susceptibility testing for common diseases is expanding, but little is known about race group differences in test perceptions. The purpose of this study was to examine differences between African Americans and Whites in knowledge, attitudes, and motivations regarding genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Before enrolling in an AD genetic testing research trial, 313 first-degree relatives of AD patients (20% African American; 71% female; mean age = 58 years) were surveyed regarding: (1) knowledge about genetics and AD risk; (2) concerns about developing AD; and (3) reasons for seeking testing. In comparison to Whites, African Americans were less knowledgeable about genetics and AD risk (p<.01) and less concerned about developing AD (p<.05), with lower levels of perceived disease risk (p=.04). The results suggest that African Americans and Whites differ notably in their knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes regarding genetic testing for AD. Additional research with more representative samples is needed to better understand these differences.
Genetic testing; African Americans; Alzheimer’s disease; APOE; Risk assessment; Susceptibility testing; Health beliefs; Health literacy; Health disparities
Alzheimer disease is the most common cause of dementia. It occurs worldwide and affects all ethnic groups. The incidence of Alzheimer disease is increasing due, in part, to increased life expectancy and the aging baby boomer generation. The average lifetime risk of developing Alzheimer disease is 10–12%. This risk at least doubles with the presence of a first-degree relative with the disorder. Despite its limited utility, patients express concern over their risk and, in some instances, request testing. Furthermore, research has demonstrated that testing individuals for apoli-poprotein E can be valuable and safe in certain contexts. However, because of the complicated genetic nature of the disorder, few clinicians are prepared to address the genetic risks of Alzheimer disease with their patients. Given the increased awareness in family history thanks to family history campaigns, the increasing incidence of Alzheimer disease, and the availability of direct to consumer testing, patient requests for information is increasing. This practice guideline provides clinicians with a framework for assessing their patients’ genetic risk for Alzheimer disease, identifying which individuals may benefit from genetic testing, and providing the key elements of genetic counseling for AD.
Alzheimer disease; dementia; guideline; genetic testing; genetic counseling
New genetic tests reveal risks for multiple conditions simultaneously, although little is understood about the psychological factors that affect testing uptake. We assessed a conceptual model called the Multiplex Genetic Testing Model (MGTM) using structural equation modeling (SEM). The MGTM delineates worry, perceived severity, perceived risk, response efficacy and attitudes toward testing as predictors of intentions and behavior. Participants were 270 healthy insured adults age 25–40 from the Multiplex Initiative conducted within a health care system in Detroit MI, USA. Participants were offered a genetic test that assessed risk for eight common health conditions. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that worry, perceived risk and severity clustered into two disease domains: cancer or metabolic conditions. Only perceived severity of metabolic conditions was correlated with general response efficacy (β=0.13, p<0.05), which predicted general attitudes toward testing (β=0.24, p<0.01). Consistent with our hypothesized model, attitudes towards testing were the strongest predictors of intentions to undergo testing (β=0.49, p<0.01), which in turn predicted testing uptake (OR 17.7, β=0.97, p<0.01). The MGTM explained a striking 48% of the variance in intentions and 94% of the variation in uptake. These findings support use of the MGTM to explain psychological predictors of testing for multiple health conditions.
Genetic testing; Multiplex Initiative; health behavior; common disease; structural equation modeling; personalized medicine; U.S.A.
Perceptions about the pros and cons of genetic susceptibility testing are among the best predictors of test utilization. How actual testing changes such perceptions has yet to be examined.
In a clinical trial, first-degree relatives of patients with Alzheimer disease received genetic risk assessments for Alzheimer disease including APOE disclosure. Participants rated 11 possible benefits associated with genetic testing (pros) and 10 risks or limitations (cons) before genetic risk disclosure and again 12 months afterward.
Pros were rated higher than cons at baseline (3.53 vs. 1.83, P < 0.001) and at 12 months after risk disclosure (3.33 vs. 1.88, P < 0.001). Ratings of pros decreased during the 12-month period (3.33 vs. 3.53, P < 0.001). Ratings of cons did not change (1.88 vs. 1.83, P = 0.199) except for a three-item discrimination subscale which increased (2.07 vs. 1.92, P = 0.012). Among specific pros and cons, three items related to prevention and treatment changed the most.
The process of APOE genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer disease sensitizes some to its limitations and the risks of discrimination; however, 1-year after disclosure, test recipients still consider the pros to strongly outweigh the cons.
Alzheimer; pros; cons; benefits; discrimination; genetics; risk; APOE; susceptibility testing; education
The association of elevated serum uric acid with the development of hypertension is established outside of pregnancy. We investigated whether first trimester uric acid was associated with the development of the following: gestational hypertension or preeclampsia, these outcomes stratified by presence of hyperuricemia at delivery since this denotes more severe disease, preterm birth or small for gestational age (SGA).
Uric acid was measured in 1541 banked maternal plasma samples from a prior prospective cohort study that were collected at a mean gestational age of 9.0 (± 2.5) weeks. Polytomous regressions were performed and adjusted for parity and pre-pregnancy body mass index.
First trimester uric acid in the highest quartile (>3.56 mg/dL) compared to lowest three quartiles was associated with an increased risk of developing preeclampsia (adjusted OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.03–3.21) but not gestational hypertension. In women with hypertensive disease complicated by hyperuricemia at delivery, high first trimester uric acid was associated with a 3.22-fold increased risk of hyperuricemic gestational hypertension and a 3.65-fold increased risk of hyperuricemic preeclampsia. High first trimester uric acid was not associated with gestational hypertension or preeclampsia without hyperuricemia at delivery, preterm birth, or SGA. In women who developed hypertensive disease, elevated uric acid at delivery was only partly explained by elevated uric acid in the first trimester (r2 = .23).
First trimester elevated uric acid was associated with later preeclampsia and more strongly with preeclampsia and gestational hypertension with hyperuricemia.
gestational hypertension; hyperuricemia; preeclampsia; uric acid