Literature DB >> 26810768

Disclosing Pleiotropic Effects During Genetic Risk Assessment for Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Trial.

Kurt D Christensen, J Scott Roberts, Peter J Whitehouse, Charmaine D M Royal, Thomas O Obisesan, L Adrienne Cupples, Jacqueline A Vernarelli, Deepak L Bhatt, Erin Linnenbringer, Melissa B Butson, Grace-Ann Fasaye, Wendy R Uhlmann, Susan Hiraki, Na Wang, Robert Cook-Deegan, Robert C Green.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Increasing use of genetic testing raises questions about disclosing secondary findings, including pleiotropic information.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and behavioral effect of disclosing modest associations between apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype and coronary artery disease (CAD) risk during APOE-based genetic risk assessments for Alzheimer disease (AD).
DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter equivalence clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00462917).
SETTING: 4 teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 257 asymptomatic adults were enrolled, 69% of whom had 1 AD-affected first-degree relative. INTERVENTION: Disclosure of genetic risk information about AD and CAD (AD+CAD) or AD only (AD-only). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) scores at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were all measures at 6 weeks and 6 months and test-related distress and health behavior changes at 12 months.
RESULTS: At 12 months, mean BAI scores were 3.5 in both the AD-only and AD+CAD groups (difference, 0.0 [95% CI, -1.0 to 1.0]), and mean CES-D scores were 6.4 and 7.1 in the AD-only and AD+CAD groups, respectively (difference, 0.7 [CI, -1.0 to 2.4]). Both confidence bounds fell within the equivalence margin of ±5 points. Among carriers of the APOE ε4 allele, distress was lower in the AD+CAD groups (difference, -4.8 [CI, -8.6 to -1.0]) (P = 0.031 for the interaction between group and APOE genotype). Participants in the AD+CAD groups also reported more health behavior changes, regardless of APOE genotype. LIMITATIONS: Outcomes were self-reported by volunteers without severe anxiety, severe depression, or cognitive problems. Analyses omitted 33 randomly assigned participants.
CONCLUSION: Disclosure of pleiotropic information did not increase anxiety or depression and may have decreased distress among persons at increased risk for 2 conditions. Providing risk modification information about CAD improved health behaviors. Findings highlight the potential benefits of disclosure of secondary genetic findings when options exist for decreasing risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Human Genome Research Institute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26810768      PMCID: PMC4979546          DOI: 10.7326/M15-0187

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  39 in total

Review 1.  Ancillary risk information and pharmacogenetic tests: social and policy implications.

Authors:  N B Henrikson; W Burke; D L Veenstra
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2007-05-08       Impact factor: 3.550

Review 2.  Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing.

Authors:  Leslie G Biesecker; Robert C Green
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-06-19       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties.

Authors:  A T Beck; N Epstein; G Brown; R A Steer
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  1988-12

4.  Returning pleiotropic results from genetic testing to patients and research participants.

Authors:  Jonathan M Kocarnik; Stephanie M Fullerton
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  The question not asked: the challenge of pleiotropic genetic tests.

Authors:  Robert Wachbroit
Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J       Date:  1998-06

6.  A randomized noninferiority trial of condensed protocols for genetic risk disclosure of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Robert C Green; Kurt D Christensen; L Adrienne Cupples; Norman R Relkin; Peter J Whitehouse; Charmaine D M Royal; Thomas O Obisesan; Robert Cook-Deegan; Erin Linnenbringer; Melissa Barber Butson; Grace-Ann Fasaye; Elana Levinson; J Scott Roberts
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 21.566

7.  Point-counterpoint. Ethics and genomic incidental findings.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Steven Joffe; Barbara A Koenig; Barbara B Biesecker; Laurence B McCullough; Jennifer S Blumenthal-Barby; Timothy Caulfield; Sharon F Terry; Robert C Green
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Health behavior changes after genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer disease: The REVEAL Study.

Authors:  Serena Chao; J Scott Roberts; Theresa M Marteau; Rebecca Silliman; L Adrienne Cupples; Robert C Green
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  2008 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.703

9.  Effectiveness of a condensed protocol for disclosing APOE genotype and providing risk education for Alzheimer disease.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; Clara A Chen; Wendy R Uhlmann; Robert C Green
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 10.  The Rapid Assessment of Physical Activity (RAPA) among older adults.

Authors:  Tari D Topolski; James LoGerfo; Donald L Patrick; Barbara Williams; Julie Walwick; Marsha B Patrick
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2006-09-15       Impact factor: 2.830

View more
  17 in total

1.  Disclosing genetic risk of Alzheimer's disease to cognitively impaired patients and visit companions: Findings from the REVEAL Study.

Authors:  Yue Guan; Debra L Roter; Lori H Erby; Jennifer L Wolff; Laura N Gitlin; J Scott Roberts; Robert C Green; Kurt D Christensen
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-12-14

2.  Clinical implications of APOE genotyping for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk estimation: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Victoria S Marshe; Ilona Gorbovskaya; Sarah Kanji; Maxine Kish; Daniel J Müller
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 3.575

3.  Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease: Attitudes Toward Personal Information in Health Records.

Authors:  Sherry-Ann Brown; Hayan Jouni; Tariq S Marroush; Iftikhar J Kullo
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Impact of SLCO1B1 Pharmacogenetic Testing on Patient and Healthcare Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jason L Vassy; Sojeong Chun; Sanjay Advani; Sophie A Ludin; Jason G Smith; Elaine C Alligood
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  A randomized trial Examining The Impact Of Communicating Genetic And Lifestyle Risks For Obesity.

Authors:  Catharine Wang; Erynn S Gordon; Tricia Norkunas; Lisa Wawak; Ching-Ti Liu; Michael Winter; Rachel S Kasper; Michael F Christman; Robert C Green; Deborah J Bowen
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.002

Review 6.  Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; Anne K Patterson; Wendy R Uhlmann
Journal:  Neurobiol Dis       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 5.996

7.  Disclosure of Personalized Rheumatoid Arthritis Risk Using Genetics, Biomarkers, and Lifestyle Factors to Motivate Health Behavior Improvements: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Sparks; Maura D Iversen; Zhi Yu; Nellie A Triedman; Maria G Prado; Rachel Miller Kroouze; Sarah S Kalia; Michael L Atkinson; Elinor A Mody; Simon M Helfgott; Derrick J Todd; Paul F Dellaripa; Bonnie L Bermas; Karen H Costenbader; Kevin D Deane; Bing Lu; Robert C Green; Elizabeth W Karlson
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 4.794

8.  Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maia J Frieser; Sylia Wilson; Scott Vrieze
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 4.267

9.  Imaging regiospecific lipid turnover in mouse brain with desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Richard H Carson; Charlotte R Lewis; Mercede N Erickson; Anna P Zagieboylo; Bradley C Naylor; Kelvin W Li; Paul B Farnsworth; John C Price
Journal:  J Lipid Res       Date:  2017-07-25       Impact factor: 5.922

10.  Effects of participation in a U.S. trial of newborn genomic sequencing on parents at risk for depression.

Authors:  Talia S Schwartz; Kurt D Christensen; Melissa K Uveges; Susan E Waisbren; Amy L McGuire; Stacey Pereira; Jill O Robinson; Alan H Beggs; Robert C Green; Gloria A Bachmann; Arnold B Rabson; Ingrid A Holm
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.