Literature DB >> 23055102

The challenge of implementing genetic tests with clinical utility while avoiding unsound applications.

Martina C Cornel1, Carla G van El, Pascal Borry.   

Abstract

Genetics and genomics have developed fast in the last decade, but have not revolutionized medicine, as some had expected. While translation of research findings to public health applications is lagging behind, direct-to-consumer (DTC) offers of genetic testing have become available, both for monogenic and severe genetic disorders and for genetic variants possibly associated with common complex diseases (susceptibility variants). The European Society of Human Genetics is concerned about the way in which commercial companies are currently introducing genetic tests into the market outside of the scope of the traditional health-care system. There is a sort of a paradox between the lagging implementation in health care of the few genetic tests with proven clinical utility, on the one hand, and the speedy DTC offer of tests, with or without clinical utility. To translate research findings into appropriate clinical applications, assessment of the clinical validity and utility is needed. Many of the parameters needed in assessment frameworks are not available yet. Clinically relevant associations between genetic variants and disease risks have been established, e.g., in oncogenetics and cardiogenetics, and can be used to reflect on the possibilities and obstacles in using the new genetics in public health. In the absence of sufficient information on clinical validity and clinical utility, introduction of genetic tests in common complex disorders is often premature. Priority should be given to settings where clinical utility is proven or likely, to gain additional information concerning diagnosis, prognosis, and disease management. Monitoring and evaluation are essential.

Entities:  

Year:  2012        PMID: 23055102      PMCID: PMC3890066          DOI: 10.1007/s12687-012-0121-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Community Genet        ISSN: 1868-310X


  23 in total

1.  Is there a doctor in the house? : The presence of physicians in the direct-to-consumer genetic testing context.

Authors:  Heidi Carmen Howard; Pascal Borry
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-09-06

Review 2.  Evaluation of the validity and utility of genetic testing for rare diseases.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse; Lisa Kalman; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.622

3.  Genetic horoscopes: is it all in the genes? Points for regulatory control of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Christine Patch; Jorge Sequeiros; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Clinical utility gene card for: Lynch syndrome (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2).

Authors:  Nils Rahner; Verena Steinke; Brigitte Schlegelberger; Sylviane Olschwang; François Eisinger; Pierre Hutter
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Out of sequence: how consumer genomics could displace clinical genetics.

Authors:  Morris W Foster; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 6.  Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework: how to assess relevance and possibilities. Background Document to the ESHG recommendations on genetic testing and common disorders.

Authors:  Frauke Becker; Carla G van El; Dolores Ibarreta; Eleni Zika; Stuart Hogarth; Pascal Borry; Anne Cambon-Thomsen; Jean Jacques Cassiman; Gerry Evers-Kiebooms; Shirley Hodgson; A Cécile J W Janssens; Helena Kaariainen; Michael Krawczak; Ulf Kristoffersson; Jan Lubinski; Christine Patch; Victor B Penchaszadeh; Andrew Read; Wolf Rogowski; Jorge Sequeiros; Lisbeth Tranebjaerg; Irene M van Langen; Helen Wallace; Ron Zimmern; Jörg Schmidtke; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework.

Authors:  Carla G van El; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Implications of the Human Genome Project for medical science.

Authors:  F S Collins; V A McKusick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-02-07       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  The genomic applications in practice and prevention network.

Authors:  Muin J Khoury; W Gregory Feero; Michele Reyes; Toby Citrin; Andrew Freedman; Debra Leonard; Wylie Burke; Ralph Coates; Robert T Croyle; Karen Edwards; Sharon Kardia; Colleen McBride; Teri Manolio; Gurvaneet Randhawa; Rebekah Rasooly; Jeannette St Pierre; Sharon Terry
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  How can the evaluation of genetic tests be enhanced? Lessons learned from the ACCE framework and evaluating genetic tests in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Simon Sanderson; Ron Zimmern; Mark Kroese; Julian Higgins; Christine Patch; Jon Emery
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  7 in total

1.  Predictive genetic testing, risk communication, and risk perception: an international expert meeting in Berlin, Germany.

Authors:  Eva Fisher; Steffi Achilles; Holger Tönnies
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-12-10

Review 2.  Third party interpretation of raw genetic data: an ethical exploration.

Authors:  Lauren Badalato; Louiza Kalokairinou; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Psychometric properties of the Pediatric Testing Attitudes Scale-Diabetes (P-TAS-D) for parents of children undergoing predictive risk screening.

Authors:  Kenneth P Tercyak; Darren Mays; Suzanne Bennett Johnson; Johnny Ludvigsson; Ulrica Swartling
Journal:  Pediatr Diabetes       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 4.866

Review 4.  Implementation and implications for polygenic risk scores in healthcare.

Authors:  John L Slunecka; Matthijs D van der Zee; Jeffrey J Beck; Brandon N Johnson; Casey T Finnicum; René Pool; Jouke-Jan Hottenga; Eco J C de Geus; Erik A Ehli
Journal:  Hum Genomics       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 4.639

5.  Direct to consumer testing in reproductive contexts--should health professionals be concerned?

Authors:  Heather Skirton
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2015-04-29

6.  Opinion: redefining the role of the physician in laboratory medicine in the context of emerging technologies, personalised medicine and patient autonomy ('4P medicine').

Authors:  Matthias Orth; Maria Averina; Stylianos Chatzipanagiotou; Gilbert Faure; Alexander Haushofer; Vesna Kusec; Augusto Machado; Siraj A Misbah; Wytze Oosterhuis; Kari Pulkki; Patrick J Twomey; Eberhard Wieland
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2017-12-22       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 7.  Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Loredana Covolo; Sara Rubinelli; Elisabetta Ceretti; Umberto Gelatti
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 5.428

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.