AIMS: Emerging research may soon lead to improved quit rates via genetically-tailored smoking cessation treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore individuals' beliefs and attitudes about genetic testing in this context, and how these may differ across racial groups. DESIGN: Two site qualitative study. METHODS: Eleven focus groups were conducted in 2007 with 51 Black and 55 White adult participants in Montgomery, AL and Baltimore, MD. MEASUREMENTS: Questions were asked about smoking as an addiction, the role of genetics in nicotine addiction susceptibility, and undergoing genetic testing to receive tailored smoking cessation treatment. Data were analyzed using content analysis. FINDINGS: Most participants believed that smoking was an addiction yet were unwilling to endorse the notion that genetics played a role in nicotine addiction susceptibility. However, 91% of White participants and 62% of Black participants indicated that they would likely take a genetic test that would match them to their optimal smoking cessation treatment. The primary potential benefit was a vague sense that additional knowledge about oneself would be of value. Primary barriers included disinterest and skepticism about the test, unwillingness to believe that genetics played a role in nicotine addiction or treatment response, and concerns about psychological consequences. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participants, particularly Black participants, did not believe that genetics played a significant role in nicotine addiction susceptibility but were willing to undergo genetic testing. Participants identified some benefit to tailoring smoking treatment by genotype. However, participants also expressed skepticism about the test and concerns about its consequences; these issues would need to be addressed in the clinical encounter.
AIMS: Emerging research may soon lead to improved quit rates via genetically-tailored smoking cessation treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore individuals' beliefs and attitudes about genetic testing in this context, and how these may differ across racial groups. DESIGN: Two site qualitative study. METHODS: Eleven focus groups were conducted in 2007 with 51 Black and 55 White adult participants in Montgomery, AL and Baltimore, MD. MEASUREMENTS: Questions were asked about smoking as an addiction, the role of genetics in nicotine addiction susceptibility, and undergoing genetic testing to receive tailored smoking cessation treatment. Data were analyzed using content analysis. FINDINGS: Most participants believed that smoking was an addiction yet were unwilling to endorse the notion that genetics played a role in nicotine addiction susceptibility. However, 91% of Whiteparticipants and 62% of Black participants indicated that they would likely take a genetic test that would match them to their optimal smoking cessation treatment. The primary potential benefit was a vague sense that additional knowledge about oneself would be of value. Primary barriers included disinterest and skepticism about the test, unwillingness to believe that genetics played a role in nicotine addiction or treatment response, and concerns about psychological consequences. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participants, particularly Black participants, did not believe that genetics played a significant role in nicotine addiction susceptibility but were willing to undergo genetic testing. Participants identified some benefit to tailoring smoking treatment by genotype. However, participants also expressed skepticism about the test and concerns about its consequences; these issues would need to be addressed in the clinical encounter.
Authors: Caryn Lerman; Christopher Jepson; E Paul Wileyto; Leonard H Epstein; Margaret Rukstalis; Freda Patterson; Vyga Kaufmann; Stephanie Restine; Larry Hawk; Ray Niaura; Wade Berrettini Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Karen L Cropsey; Michael F Weaver; Gloria D Eldridge; Gabriela C Villalobos; Al M Best; Maxine L Stitzer Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2009-04-22 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Steven S Fu; Diana Burgess; Michelle van Ryn; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Jody Solomon; Anne M Joseph Journal: Prev Med Date: 2006-12-18 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Wade H Berrettini; E Paul Wileyto; Leonard Epstein; Stephanie Restine; Larry Hawk; Peter Shields; Ray Niaura; Caryn Lerman Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2006-07-28 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: C Lerman; P G Shields; J Audrain; D Main; B Cobb; N R Boyd; N Caporaso Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Giselle K Perez; Ilana F Gareen; JoRean Sicks; Christopher Lathan; Alaina Carr; Pallavi Kumar; Colin Ponzani; Kelly Hyland; Elyse R Park Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2019-02-08
Authors: Jennifer B McClure; Gary E Swan; Jackie St John; Randy Fauver; Harold S Javitz; Andrew W Bergen; Denise Nishita; Raymond Niaura; Marcus R Munafò; Sean P David Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 4.244