Literature DB >> 10464572

Genetic testing and Alzheimer disease: recommendations of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society.

L M McConnell1, B A Koenig, H T Greely, T A Raffin.   

Abstract

Several genes associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) have been localized and cloned; two genetic tests are already commercially available, and new tests are being developed. Genetic testing for AD--either for disease prediction or for diagnosis--raises critical ethical concerns. The multidisciplinary Alzheimer Disease Working Group of the Stanford Program in Genomics, Ethics, and Society (PGES) presents comprehensive recommendations on genetic testing for AD. The Group concludes that under current conditions, genetic testing for AD prediction or diagnosis is only rarely appropriate. Criteria for judging the readiness of a test for introduction into routine clinical practice typically rely heavily on evaluation of technical efficacy. PGES recommends a broader and more comprehensive approach, considering: 1) the unique social and historical meanings of AD; 2) the availability of procedures to promote good surrogate decision making for incompetent patients and to safeguard confidentiality; 3) access to sophisticated genetic counselors able to communicate complex risk information and effectively convey the social costs and psychological burdens of testing, such as unintentional disclosure of predictive genetic information to family members; 4) protection from inappropriate advertising and marketing of genetic tests; and 5) recognition of the need for public education about the meaning and usefulness of predictive and diagnostic tests for AD. In this special issue of Genetic Testing, the PGES recommendations are published along with comprehensive background papers authored by Working Group members.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10464572     DOI: 10.1089/gte.1999.3.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Test        ISSN: 1090-6576


  8 in total

1.  Debating clinical utility.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; A-M Laberge; N Press
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 2.  Genetic counselling for schizophrenia in the era of molecular genetics.

Authors:  K A Hodgkinson; J Murphy; S O'Neill; L Brzustowicz; A S Bassett
Journal:  Can J Psychiatry       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.356

3.  The role of disease perceptions and results sharing in psychological adaptation after genetic susceptibility testing: the REVEAL Study.

Authors:  Sato Ashida; Laura M Koehly; J Scott Roberts; Clara A Chen; Susan Hiraki; Robert C Green
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 4.  Nicotine addiction through a neurogenomic prism: ethics, public health, and smoking.

Authors:  Lorraine Caron; Katrina Karkazis; Thomas A Raffin; Gary Swan; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.244

5.  Genetics and genetic counseling: recommendations for Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.

Authors:  Jennifer Williamson; Susan LaRusse
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 6.  Prospects for prediction: ethics analysis of neuroimaging in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  J Illes; A Rosen; M Greicius; E Racine
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  Katie Skeehan; Christopher Heaney; Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Addressing ethical challenges of disclosure in dementia prediction: limitations of current guidelines and suggestions to proceed.

Authors:  Zümrüt Alpinar-Sencan; Silke Schicktanz
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 2.652

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.