Use Of Predictive Genetic Testing Research Articles

Stakeholder knowledge and attitudes toward the use of predictive genetic testing in South Africa.

The use of predictive genetic testing, particularly for risk profiling in non-communicable diseases (NCDs), has the potential to benefit public health by decreasing the disease burden and alleviating the pressure on healthcare. It is thus important to assess knowledge and uptake among stakeholders. This study aimed to assess end users’ (community, medical practitioners and medical students) knowledge and attitudes regarding the use and support of genomic medicine. A descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted in Kwazulu-Natal (KZN) among 3 groups of stakeholders (n = 170): medical practitioners from both private and public healthcare, medical students from UKZN and community members represented by teachers. Three structured questionnaires using a Likert scale were administered. Responses were stratified by practice type, and a scoring scale was developed. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to reduce data on all constructs that made up each variable. All three groups showed adequate knowledge and a positive attitude towards use, apart from medical students who were not as keen to support future use in their own practice. Although medical practitioners supported the use of this technology, with necessary guidelines, expertise and affordability, only 18% from private practice reported having used it. PCA reduced data to fewer parsimonious constructs for all 3 groups: common threads included an awareness that genetic testing may improve health and disease outcomes; guidelines for use; and the provision of education to increase awareness, training to bolster expertise and confidence to use these services. Participants in this study attributed a lack of uptake to limited expertise and professional support, and a lack of legislative guidelines. We recommend updating continuing professional development for medical practitioners and promoting community education concomitantly. Provision of guidelines and increased accessibility to resources are important.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12687-022-00606-y.

Willingness to Pay for Cancer Genetic Testing in a Tertiary Healthcare Centre

INTRODUCTION: Increasing use of predictive genetic testing to address hereditary cancer risk has been commonly assessed by cost sharing practices. Little is known about how demographics, knowledge, attitude and practices may influence these individuals’ willingness to pay for cancer genetic testing. The objective of this research was to determine factors associated with willingness to pay for cancer genetic testing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 175 respondents in the oncology and day care unit in one of tertiary healthcare centre. The respondents comprised cancer patients, their family members and the community. RESULTS: A total of 117 (66.9%) participants were willing to pay for cancer genetic testing. Ninety three (79.5%) of respondents were willing to pay from their own pocket with a mean of MYR1201.77 (SD976.72) and 95 (54.3%) respondents were willing to pay, shared with insurance. There were significant associations between willingness to pay with status of respondent as patients or family members or community, gender, race, educational level, income, knowledge and attitude. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate factors associated with willingness to pay not only among cancer patients but also their family members and the community. These findings reveal that majority of respondents believe there is valuable personal benefit based on genetic risk information and they are willing to pay for it.

Anti-selection & Genetic Testing in Insurance: An Interdisciplinary Perspective

Anti-selection occurs when information asymmetry exists between an insurer and an applicant. When an applicant knows that they are at high risk of loss, but the insurer does not, the applicant may try to exploit this knowledge differential to secure insurance at a lower premium that does not match risk. Predictive genetic testing could lead to anti-selection if individuals, but not insurers, learn of genetic risk. Yet, to address fear of discrimination, several countries have, or are considering, limitations on insurers’ use of predictive genetic test results. In this paper, we discuss anti-selection theory and modeling and illustrate how regulation regarding insurer use of predictive genetic test results could impact anti-selection in insurance markets. The extent of this impact turns on how much individuals alter their insurance purchasing behavior following predictive genetic testing. At first blush it may seem likely that those who learn that they are at high-risk of a genetic condition would attempt to gain greater coverage. However, we highlight several domains of on-the-ground realities that challenge this baseline assumption. These real-world considerations should be incorporated into modeling of anti-selection to truly assess the potential impacts of regulation limiting insurer use of predictive genetic testing.

Should life insurers have access to genetic test results?

Should life insurers have access to genetic test results?

Are public health professionals prepared for public health genomics? A cross-sectional survey in Italy.

BackgroundPublic health genomics is an emerging multidisciplinary approach, which aims to integrate genome-based knowledge in a responsible and effective way into public health. Despite several surveys performed to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and professional behaviors of physicians towards predictive genetic testing, similar surveys have not been carried out for public health practitioners. This study is the first to assess knowledge, attitudes and training needs of public health professionals in the field of predictive genetic testing for chronic diseases.MethodsA self-administered questionnaire was used to carry out a cross-sectional survey of a random sample of Italian public health professionals.ResultsA response rate of 67.4% (797 questionnaires) was achieved. Italian public health professionals have the necessary attitudinal background to contribute to the proper use of predictive genetic testing for chronic diseases, but they need additional training to increase their methodological knowledge. Knowledge significantly increases with exposure to predictive genetic testing during postgraduate training (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05–2.88), time dedicated to continuing medical education (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.14–2.04) and level of English language knowledge (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.07–1.72). Adequate knowledge is the strongest predictor of positive attitudes from a public health perspective (OR = 3.98, 95% CI = 2.44–6.50). Physicians show a lower level of knowledge and more public health attitudes than other public health professionals do. About 80% of public health professionals considered their knowledge inadequate and 86.0% believed that it should be improved through specific postgraduate training courses.ConclusionsSpecific and targeted training initiatives are needed to develop a skilled public health workforce competent in identifying genomic technology that is ready for use in population health and in modeling public health genomic programs and primary care services that need to be developed, implemented and evaluated.

Cost Sharing and Hereditary Cancer Risk: Predictors of Willingness‐to‐Pay for Genetic Testing

Increasing use of predictive genetic testing to gauge hereditary cancer risk has been paralleled by rising cost-sharing practices. Little is known about how demographic and psychosocial factors may influence individuals' willingness-to-pay for genetic testing. The Gastrointestinal Tumor Risk Assessment Program Registry includes individuals presenting for genetic risk assessment based on personal/family cancer history. Participants complete a baseline survey assessing cancer history and psychosocial items. Willingness-to-pay items include intention for: genetic testing only if paid by insurance; testing with self-pay; and amount willing-to-pay ($25-$2,000). Multivariable models examined predictors of willingness-to-pay out-of-pocket (versus only if paid by insurance) and willingness-to-pay a smaller versus larger sum (≤$200 vs. ≥$500). All statistical tests are two-sided (α = 0.05). Of 385 evaluable participants, a minority (42%) had a personal cancer history, while 56% had ≥1 first-degree relative with colorectal cancer. Overall, 21.3% were willing to have testing only if paid by insurance, and 78.7% were willing-to-pay. Predictors of willingness-to-pay were: 1) concern for positive result; 2) confidence to control cancer risk; 3) fewer perceived barriers to colorectal cancer screening; 4) benefit of testing to guide screening (all p < 0.05). Subjects willing-to-pay a higher amount were male, more educated, had greater cancer worry, fewer relatives with colorectal cancer, and more positive attitudes toward genetic testing (all p < 0.05). Individuals seeking risk assessment are willing-to-pay out-of-pocket for genetic testing, and anticipate benefits to reducing cancer risk. Identifying factors associated with willingness-to-pay for genetic services is increasingly important as testing is integrated into routine cancer care.

The Economics of Personalization in Prevention and Public Health.

Personalized prevention uses family history and predictive genetic testing to identify people at high risk of serious diseases. The availability of predictive genetic tests is a newer and still-developing phenomenon. Many observers see tremendous potential for personalized prevention to improve public health. At the same time, the emergence of these new markets raises familiar health policy concerns about costs, cost-effectiveness, and health disparities. This paper first discusses an economic framework for the analysis of personalized prevention. On the demand side, consumers use personalized prevention as a form of information that allows them to make better choices about prevention, including medical care and health behaviors like diet and exercise. On the supply side, an interplay of complex market forces and regulations will determine the prices, advertising, and insurance coverage of predictive genetic tests. Beyond the question of whether health insurance will cover the costs of predictive genetic tests, there is a great deal of concern about whether consumers' use of genetic tests might place them at risk of genetic discrimination or might lead to adverse selection. The paper also reports descriptive analysis of data from the 2000, 2005, and 2010 National Health Interview Surveys on the use of predictive genetic tests. The empirical analysis documents large socioeconomic status-related disparities in consumers having heard of genetic tests: for example, consumers with less schooling, Blacks, and Hispanics were substantially less likely to have heard of genetic tests. Evidence from other empirical studies provides little evidence that genetic testing leads to genetic discrimination in insurance markets. There is more evidence suggesting adverse selection, where genetic testing leads consumers to purchase long-term care insurance. The paper concludes with some preliminary thoughts about important directions for future research. The goal of the paper is to review relevant research to help develop an economic approach and social science research agenda into the determinants and consequences of genetic tests for prevention.

Knowledge, attitudes and behavior of physicians regarding predictive genetic tests for breast and colorectal cancer

BackgroundGenetic testing for cancer susceptibility is an emerging technology in medicine. This study assessed the knowledge, attitudes and professional behavior of Italian physicians regarding the use of predictive genetic tests for breast and colorectal cancer, including the BRCA1/2 and APC tests. MethodsA cross-sectional survey of a random sample of Italian physicians was performed in 2010 through a self-administered questionnaire. ResultsA response rate of 69.6% (1079 questionnaires) was achieved. A significant lack of knowledge was detected, particularly for APC testing. Less than half of the physicians agreed on the importance of efficacy and cost-effectiveness evidence in the selection of predictive genetic tests to be offered to the patients. Multiple logistic regression analyses showed that education had a positive influence on knowledge, attitudes and, to a lesser extent, professional use. The factor most strongly related to the physicians' use of genetic testing was patients requests for breast (odds ratio=12.65; 95% confidence interval 7.77–20.59) or colorectal cancer tests (odds ratio=7.02; 95% confidence interval 3.61–13.64). A high level of interest for specific training was reported by almost all physicians surveyed. ConclusionsTargeted educational programs are needed to improve the expertise of physicians, and, ultimately, to enhance the appropriate use of genetic tests in clinical practice.

Consumer preferences for the predictive genetic tests for Alzheimer’s disease

With the advent of predictive genetic tests, individuals will have the option to investigate their future risk of developing diseases like Alzheimer’s disease (AD). This knowledge can benefit people as they start to prepare themselves as well as their families for the disease process. The use of predictive genetic tests will likely increase as technology and genetic marker identification continues to advance. Thus, aligning the clinical practice of predictive genetic testing for Alzheimer’s disease with patient values and preferences has the potential to improve healthcare delivery. Several issues have been identified in this review regarding people’s preference when making a decision to test for AD, which include prediction value (i.e. false-positive/false-negative results), availability of treatments that would prevent or delay onset of AD, and anonymity/confidentiality. Literature indicates the most relevant issues regarding consumer preference for AD genetic testing is predictive value (accuracy). While fewer studies have discussed the effects of treatment availability or anonymity on consumer preference, these issues may become more important as technology continues to advance and public awareness of these issues increases. Future research in the area of consumer behavior with regard to predictive genetic testing is suggested.Most previous studies regarding consumer intent and preference for AD genetic tests have used small samples, convenience samples, or samples which were predominantly Caucasian, female and high socioeconomic status. Additionally, effects of most socio-demographics on the preference for AD genetic test are unclear in the literature. Conflicting results have been found regarding gender, education, income, and culture. An extension of the previous work using a larger and randomized sample may help to provide clearer relationship between these socio-demographics and consumer preference for AD genetic test.

Genetics and insurance in the United Kingdom 1995–2010: the rise and fall of “scientific” discrimination

Around the millennium there was extensive debate in the United Kingdom about the possible use of predictive genetic tests by insurance companies. Many insurance experts, geneticists, and public policymakers appeared to believe that genetic test results would soon become widely used by the insurance industry. This expectation has not been borne out. This article outlines the history of exaggerated perceptions of the significance of genetic test results to insurance, with particular reference to the United Kingdom, suggesting reasons why they arose and also why they have declined. The article concludes with some speculation about how policy on genetics and insurance might develop in future.

Determinism and free will in the age of genetics: Theoretical-legal concerns about predictive genetic tests

The paper deals with the use of predictive genetic tests in medical research. I limit my discussion to those advances in genetics which try to overcome the limits represented by our genetic make-up, in particular by gene mutations that lead, or could lead, to the development of genetic diseases. Besides the ethical issues concerning the topic of the current discussion, the reader will also find an evaluation of the legal provisions elaborated at the different levels of the legal order (international, European, and national). The aim of this evaluation is to find out which model of Law is being adopted in bioethical issues like the one discussed in this paper. The paper underlines and argues how Law can contribute (and has already contributed at the different levels: International, European, and national) to value and to spread an ethics of responsibility.

Points to consider in assessing and appraising predictive genetic tests

The use of predictive genetic tests is expanding rapidly. Given limited health care budgets and few national coverage decisions specifically for genetic tests, evidence of benefits and harms is a key requirement in decision making; however, assessing the benefits and harms of genetic tests raises a number of challenging issues. Frequently, evidence of medical benefits and harms is limited due to practical and ethical limitations of conducting meaningful clinical trials. Also, clinical endpoints frequently do not capture the benefit appropriately because the main purpose of many genetic tests is personal utility of knowing the test results, and costs of the tests and counseling can be insufficient indicators of the total costs of care. This study provides an overview of points to consider for the assessment of benefits and harms from genetic tests in an ethically and economically reflected manner. We discuss whether genetic tests are sufficiently exceptional to warrant exceptional methods for assessment and appraisal.

How Will Information About the Genetic Risk of Mental Disorders Impact on Stigma?

To suggest ways of testing hypotheses about the impact that information on genetic risk may have on the social stigma of mental disorders and to analyse the implications of these hypotheses for genetic screening for mental disorders. Literature review and critical analysis and synthesis. An optimistic view is that information on the genetic risk for mental disorders will reduce blame and social stigma experienced by individuals living with mental disorder. A more pessimists view is that genetic risk information and the use of predictive genetic testing will lead to earlier stigmatization of those at risk of mental disorders. Research is identified that is needed to provide a better understanding of the implications of predictive genetic testing for the stigmatization of different mental health disorders. It is essential that research on the genetics of mental disorders is accompanied by social science research on the ways in which genetic findings influence the lives of those who are tested.

What Do We Tell the Children? Contrasting the Disclosure Choices of Two HD Families Regarding Risk Statusand Predictive Genetic Testing

Above all else, predictive genetic testing provides information. Gaining insight into the psychosocial effects of this information is a primary goal of genetic counseling. For individuals utilizing predictive genetic testing, the acquisition of genetic information requires choices regarding disclosure within the family. This study uses a phenomenological methodology to explore the contrasting choices of two sets of HD parents regarding the disclosure of genetic risk status to their children. Additionally, the children (now adults) discuss their lived experience growing up with contrasting disclosure dynamics, and their current views regarding the use of predictive genetic testing for themselves. The primary finding of this study is that all of the adult children now express preference for early disclosure of genetic risk and an open/supportive communication style regarding HD. This finding has value for clinicians working with HD families who must make decisions regarding disclosure issues related to predictive genetic testing.

Reconsidering the family history in primary care.

The purpose of this paper is to review the role of the family history in predictive genetic testing, describe how family history taking is practiced in adult primary care, identify the current barriers to appropriate application of the family history, and outline the requirements for a new family history tool for primary care. We reviewed current perspectives on the family history, identifying key references in the medical literature and web-based family history tools through discussions with multiple content experts in clinical genetics, family medicine, and internal medicine. We conducted a Medline query using the search terms family history and primary care to identify references from the past 10 years. To illustrate the usefulness of family history information, we calculated the predictive value of family history and genetic information for familial adenomatous polyposis using current references and standard formulas. We identified paper and web-based family history tools through discussions with content experts. We also conducted a search on the World Wide Web to identify resources for electronic medical record and family history. The family history is the most important tool for diagnosis and risk assessment in medical genetics, and promises to serve as a critical element in the use of predictive genetic testing in primary care. Traditional medical education about family history has often been unsophisticated and use of family history in adult primary care has been limited, compounded by multiple substantive barriers. Although there are numerous paper and computer-based aides for taking the family history, none currently meets all the needs of adult primary care. The patient's family history remains a critical element in risk assessment for many conditions, but substantive barriers impede application in primary care practice, and evidence for its contribution to improved health outcomes is limited in this setting. Short of radical changes in reimbursement, new tools will be required to aid primary care physicians in the efficient collection and application of patient family history in the era of genetic testing.

Inherited breast carcinoma--prospective findings in 1,194 women at risk.

According to preset criteria, 1,194 women at risk for inherited breast carcinoma were selected and subjected to examination. Six hundred and three women were examined once, 591 were followed for a mean of 1.8 years. Twenty infiltrating cancers (median age 49 years) and 16 precancers (median age 44 years) were found, demonstrating that breast carcinoma continued to occur in the selected families as expected under the hypothesis of dominant inheritance. At first round, 14 (1.2%) infiltrating carcinomas and a total of 22 (1.8%) cancers or precancers were found. Incidence rates of 0.58% pr. year for infiltrating cancers, and 1.04% pr. year for cancer or precancer were calculated. This confirms the tentative conclusions that were drawn in our previous report. These are the first prospective reports documenting how to delineate a high risk group for premenopausal breast cancer, and how to diagnose cancer at an early stage. All but two affected women had cancer without lymph node metastasis. Although a longer observation time is needed, we cautiously conclude that the results are in keeping with our aim of providing safety for those at risk. Clinical use of predictive genetic testing may be implemented within these families.