Literature DB >> 22846729

Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing and cancer risk prediction.

Cecelia A Bellcross1, Patricia Z Page, Dana Meaney-Delman.   

Abstract

The last several years has witnessed an explosion in genomics, with the advent of genome-wide association studies revealing hundreds of DNA variants significantly associated with most common diseases, including cancer. On the heels of these scientific advances came the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing industry. Genome-wide scans for disease have been marketed and sold directly to the public, without the involvement of a health care provider. Unlike genetic testing for mutations in known hereditary cancer susceptibility genes such as BRCA1/2, these genomic profiles examine DNA variants, which typically have a minimal risk impact, and account for only a fraction of the heritable component of cancer. Furthermore, risk information provided to consumers does not account for family history or other known risk factors. The clinical validity and utility of personal genome scans for disease risk prediction remain for the most part unestablished, although some argue lack of evidence of harm and the possibility that positive impacts on health behaviors or genetic awareness may result from consumer use. The DTC genetic testing industry has sparked significant controversy not only among the scientific community, but also among professional societies and government agencies.In this review, we present some of the history and methodological considerations of DTC genomic profiling, with a focus on cancer risk prediction. The literature regarding consumer awareness and utilization is explored, including understanding, expectations, and behavioral and psychological responses to DTC genomic risk prediction. Primary care provider and genetic professional knowledge and perceptions of DTC genomic profiling are also addressed. Ethical and scientific controversy surrounding the DTC genetic testing industry is presented, along with policy recommendations, regulatory actions, and the changing landscape of the DTC genetic testing market in response. Although our understanding of the human genome holds much promise in the realm of cancer prevention and treatment, DTC genomic profiling for cancer risk prediction is unlikely in its current form to have any significant impact on the health of the public. Time will tell if the next venture in genomic medicine, whole genome sequencing, will be accompanied by the translational research and emphasis on public/provider education required to ensure its successful application toward reducing the burden of cancer at a population level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22846729     DOI: 10.1097/PPO.0b013e3182610e38

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer J        ISSN: 1528-9117            Impact factor:   3.360


  20 in total

1.  Molecular and genomic sciences in health: apply the established rules of evidence.

Authors:  Oliver Razum; Albrecht Jahn
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 3.380

2.  Risks of nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics? What the scientists say.

Authors:  T Hurlimann; V Menuz; J Graham; J Robitaille; M-C Vohl; B Godard
Journal:  Genes Nutr       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 5.523

3.  The mathematical limits of genetic prediction for complex chronic disease.

Authors:  Katherine M Keyes; George Davey Smith; Karestan C Koenen; Sandro Galea
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  Does personal genome testing drive service utilization in an adult preventive medicine clinic?

Authors:  Ny Hoang; Robin Hayeems; Jill Davies; Shuye Pu; Syed Wasim; Lea Velsher; James Aw; Sébastien Chénier; Dimitri J Stavropoulos; Riyana Babul-Hirji; Rosanna Weksberg; Cheryl Shuman
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-04-03

5.  Public Attitudes Toward Direct to Consumer Genetic Testing.

Authors:  Grayson L Ruhl; James W Hazel; Ellen Wright Clayton; Bradley A Malin
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2020-03-04

6.  Personal Genomic Testing for Cancer Risk: Results From the Impact of Personal Genomics Study.

Authors:  Stacy W Gray; Sarah E Gollust; Deanna Alexis Carere; Clara A Chen; Angel Cronin; Sarah S Kalia; Huma Q Rana; Mack T Ruffin; Catharine Wang; J Scott Roberts; Robert C Green
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Personalized Medicine Through SNP Testing for Breast Cancer Risk: Clinical Implementation.

Authors:  Rebecca Howe; Talya Miron-Shatz; Yaniv Hanoch; Zehra B Omer; Cristina O'Donoghue; Elissa M Ozanne
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Behavioral and psychosocial responses to genomic testing for colorectal cancer risk.

Authors:  Kristi D Graves; Kara-Grace Leventhal; Rachel Nusbaum; Yasmin Salehizadeh; Gillian W Hooker; Beth N Peshkin; Morgan Butrick; William Tuong; Jeena Mathew; David Goerlitz; Mary B Fishman; Peter G Shields; Marc D Schwartz
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2013-04-11       Impact factor: 5.736

9.  Awareness of cancer susceptibility genetic testing: the 2000, 2005, and 2010 National Health Interview Surveys.

Authors:  Phuong L Mai; Susan Thomas Vadaparampil; Nancy Breen; Timothy S McNeel; Louise Wideroff; Barry I Graubard
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  Cancer screening and genetics: a tale of two paradigms.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Heather M Edwards; Muin J Khoury; Stephen H Taplin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.