Literature DB >> 16354124

Patients' and physicians' perspectives on pharmacogenetic testing.

Anja Rogausch1, Daniela Prause, Anne Schallenberg, Jürgen Brockmöller, Wolfgang Himmel.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The integration of pharmacogenetic testing into routine care will, in part, depend upon the patients' and physicians' acceptance of these tests. Empirical data regarding patients' and physicians' views on pharmacogenetic testing are lacking.
OBJECTIVES: To explore patients' and physicians' perspectives on the potential implications of pharmacogenetic testing, particularly focusing on asthma, and to analyze the possible determinants of their expectations, hopes and fears.
METHODS: We conducted telephone interviews with patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease taking part in a larger pharmacogenetic study, in addition to general practitioners (GPs) from a different region in Germany. A total of 328 patients and 378 GPs were invited to participate. Determinants of their attitudes toward pharmacogenetic testing were assessed using logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: Informed consent to participate in this study was given by 196 patients (60%) and 106 GPs (28%). Most patients (96%) and physicians (52%) appreciated the availability of pharmacogenetic tests for a disease such as asthma. Approximately a third of the patients worried about potential unfavorable test results (35%) and violation of privacy (36%). Female patients were more likely to have a fearful attitude (odds ratio [OR]=2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.58-5.12). Younger patients were generally more likely to be hopeful about the usefulness of pharmacogenetic testing (OR=2.12; CI=1.01-4.46). The GPs' concerns were mainly related to the possibility that patients might either be put under pressure to be tested (72%) or be disadvantaged at private health insurance agencies (61%). The nature of the responsible institution, the clarity of the research aim and explicit informed consent from patients influenced a physicians' decision regarding whether to support a pharmacogenetic study.
CONCLUSION: The concerns of patients and GPs differ somewhat with respect to negative psychosocial consequences, discrimination or violation of privacy. Development of information for physicians and patients would be helpful in preventing unrealistic fears or hopes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16354124     DOI: 10.2217/14622416.7.1.49

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacogenomics        ISSN: 1462-2416            Impact factor:   2.533


  41 in total

1.  Delivering a pharmacogenetic service: is there a role for genetic counselors?

Authors:  Alice Callard; William Newman; Katherine Payne
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  The potential impact of pharmacogenetic testing on medication adherence.

Authors:  S B Haga; N M A LaPointe
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 3.550

3.  Survey of genetic counselors and clinical geneticists' use and attitudes toward pharmacogenetic testing.

Authors:  S B Haga; J M O'Daniel; G M Tindall; R Mills; I M Lipkus; R Agans
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2012-02-19       Impact factor: 4.438

4.  Assessment of patient perceptions of genomic testing to inform pharmacogenomic implementation.

Authors:  Yee Ming Lee; Ryan P McKillip; Brittany A Borden; Catherine E Klammer; Mark J Ratain; Peter H O'Donnell
Journal:  Pharmacogenet Genomics       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Civilian and military genetics: nondiscrimination policy in a post-GINA world.

Authors:  Susannah Baruch; Kathy Hudson
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  Community pharmacists' attitudes towards clinical utility and ethical implications of pharmacogenetic testing.

Authors:  Sony Tuteja; Kevin Haynes; Cara Zayac; Jon E Sprague; Barbara Bernhardt; Reed Pyeritz
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.512

7.  On the readiness of physicians for pharmacogenomics testing: an empirical assessment.

Authors:  N Amara; J Blouin-Bougie; D Bouthillier; J Simard
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.550

8.  Current Status and Future Opportunities in Lung Precision Medicine Research with a Focus on Biomarkers. An American Thoracic Society/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Research Statement.

Authors:  Ann Chen Wu; James P Kiley; Patricia J Noel; Shashi Amur; Esteban G Burchard; John P Clancy; Joshua Galanter; Maki Inada; Tiffanie K Jones; Jonathan A Kropski; James E Loyd; Lawrence M Nogee; Benjamin A Raby; Angela J Rogers; David A Schwartz; Don D Sin; Avrum Spira; Scott T Weiss; Lisa R Young; Blanca E Himes
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-12-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 9.  A review of consent practices and perspectives for pharmacogenetic testing.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga; Rachel Mills
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 2.533

10.  Patient Perceptions of Care as Influenced by a Large Institutional Pharmacogenomic Implementation Program.

Authors:  R P McKillip; B A Borden; P Galecki; S A Ham; L Patrick-Miller; J P Hall; S Hussain; K Danahey; M Siegler; M J Sorrentino; Y Sacro; A M Davis; D T Rubin; K Lipstreuer; T S Polonsky; R Nanda; W R Harper; J L Koyner; D L Burnet; W M Stadler; M J Ratain; D O Meltzer; P H O'Donnell
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 6.875

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.