Literature DB >> 18941419

Changing interpretations, stable genes: responsibilities of patients, professionals, and policy makers in the clinical interpretation of complex genetic information.

Brian H Shirts1, Lisa S Parker.   

Abstract

Except in rare mutation-inducing events, the primary sequence of an individual's somatic genome is static; however, the interpretations or risk predictions based on complex genetic tests now being introduced into the marketplace are rapidly changing. The reality of changing interpretations for stable test results creates questions for everyone involved in genetic testing including individuals, clinicians, laboratories, professional organizations, and regulators. Individuals should be aware that their relationship with laboratories providing genetic testing may be different from their relationship with their physician, especially in direct-to-consumer testing. Moreover, individuals may need to take the initiative to revisit their genetic test results periodically. Clinicians will need to learn how to read and interpret the results of complex genetic tests, remember that interpretations change over time, and understand when to refer patients to specialists and ask for second opinions and reinterpretation of genetic information. Testing laboratories should understand that they may be replacing the clinician as the direct contact for patients, and may have responsibility to inform clients of changes in test interpretation. At minimum, laboratories should make clear what their policies are regarding reinterpretation and allow tested individuals to seek outside interpretations of their genetic test results. Professional organizations and regulators have the responsibility to develop guidelines for clinicians, laboratories, and the general public. In the future, the interpretation of genetic tests may be relatively stable; until that time, the changing interpretation of static genetic test results will create an important set of professional and ethical challenges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18941419     DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31818bb38f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  16 in total

1.  The prospect of genome-guided preventive medicine: a need and opportunity for genetic counselors.

Authors:  Julianne M O'Daniel
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Anticipating the Ethical Challenges of Psychiatric Genetic Testing.

Authors:  Paul S Appelbaum; Shawna Benston
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.285

3.  Pragmatic and Ethical Challenges of Incorporating the Genome into the Electronic Medical Record.

Authors:  Adam A Nishimura; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch; Brian H Shirts
Journal:  Curr Genet Med Rep       Date:  2014-12-01

4.  Recontacting or not recontacting? A survey of current practices in clinical genetics centres in Europe.

Authors:  Fabio Sirchia; Daniele Carrieri; Sandi Dheensa; Caroline Benjamin; Hülya Kayserili; Christophe Cordier; Carla G van El; Peter D Turnpenny; Bela Melegh; Álvaro Mendes; Tanya F Halbersma-Konings; Irene M van Langen; Anneke M Lucassen; Angus J Clarke; Francesca Forzano; Susan E Kelly
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-04-23       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Informed choice in direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) websites: a content analysis of benefits, risks, and limitations.

Authors:  Amanda Singleton; Lori Hamby Erby; Kathryn V Foisie; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 6.  Primary care providers' cancer genetic testing-related knowledge, attitudes, and communication behaviors: A systematic review and research agenda.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Ekland Abdiwahab; Heather M Edwards; Min-Lin Fang; Andrew Jdayani; Erica S Breslau
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 7.  Clinical analysis and interpretation of cancer genome data.

Authors:  Eliezer M Van Allen; Nikhil Wagle; Mia A Levy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Informational content, literacy demands, and usability of websites offering health-related genetic tests directly to consumers.

Authors:  Christina R Lachance; Lori A H Erby; Beth M Ford; Vincent C Allen; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 9.  Genetics and the general physician: insights, applications and future challenges.

Authors:  J C Knight
Journal:  QJM       Date:  2009-09-07

Review 10.  Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Ellen Otten; Mirjam Plantinga; Erwin Birnie; Marian A Verkerk; Anneke M Lucassen; Adelita V Ranchor; Irene M Van Langen
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.