Emily Olfson1, Sarah Hartz2, Deanna Alexis Carere3, Robert C Green, J Scott Roberts4, Laura J Bierut5. 1. Child Study Center and Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 3. Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO; laura@wustl.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing has the potential to influence health behaviors, including smoking. Critics of this testing highlight limited evidence to support positive behavioral benefits and caution that genomic results may provide false reassurance, leading to unhealthy behaviors. This study investigates interest in genetic risks of smoking-related diseases and changes in smoking behaviors among genomic testing consumers. METHODS: From 2012 to 2013, a longitudinal series of web surveys was conducted. A total of 1464 customers of 23andMe and Pathway Genomics completed a survey prior to viewing genomic test results, of which 1002 participants provided data on smoking behaviors 6 months after receiving results. RESULTS: At baseline, 64% of participants were never smokers, 29% were former smokers, and 7% were current smokers. Most baseline current smokers were very interested in genetic risk results for lung cancer (65%) and heart disease (72%). For lung cancer, this interest was significantly greater than former (50% very interested) and never smokers (37% very interested) (p < .0001). Even though participants were interested in smoking-related disease genetic risks, 96% reported the same smoking status at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Importantly, only 1% (n = 13/916) of former and never smokers became current smokers at 6 months and 22% (n = 14/64) of current smokers reported quitting. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, smokers show a high level of interest in genetic risks of smoking-related illnesses. The experience of receiving direct-to-consumer genomic health risks does not appear to have obvious harms related to smoking behaviors, with some potential benefits. IMPLICATIONS: In the setting of ongoing controversy surrounding direct-to-consumer genomic testing, this study provides evidence that consumers are interested in genetic risk results of smoking-related diseases. Receiving genomic testing results does not lead to smoking initiation among never smokers or reinitiation among former smokers and may be associated with a higher quit rate among current smokers at 6-month follow-up than the general population. These findings ease concerns that direct-to-consumer genomic testing could lead to false reassurance and unhealthy behaviors related to smoking.
INTRODUCTION: Direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing has the potential to influence health behaviors, including smoking. Critics of this testing highlight limited evidence to support positive behavioral benefits and caution that genomic results may provide false reassurance, leading to unhealthy behaviors. This study investigates interest in genetic risks of smoking-related diseases and changes in smoking behaviors among genomic testing consumers. METHODS: From 2012 to 2013, a longitudinal series of web surveys was conducted. A total of 1464 customers of 23andMe and Pathway Genomics completed a survey prior to viewing genomic test results, of which 1002 participants provided data on smoking behaviors 6 months after receiving results. RESULTS: At baseline, 64% of participants were never smokers, 29% were former smokers, and 7% were current smokers. Most baseline current smokers were very interested in genetic risk results for lung cancer (65%) and heart disease (72%). For lung cancer, this interest was significantly greater than former (50% very interested) and never smokers (37% very interested) (p < .0001). Even though participants were interested in smoking-related disease genetic risks, 96% reported the same smoking status at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Importantly, only 1% (n = 13/916) of former and never smokers became current smokers at 6 months and 22% (n = 14/64) of current smokers reported quitting. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, smokers show a high level of interest in genetic risks of smoking-related illnesses. The experience of receiving direct-to-consumer genomic health risks does not appear to have obvious harms related to smoking behaviors, with some potential benefits. IMPLICATIONS: In the setting of ongoing controversy surrounding direct-to-consumer genomic testing, this study provides evidence that consumers are interested in genetic risk results of smoking-related diseases. Receiving genomic testing results does not lead to smoking initiation among never smokers or reinitiation among former smokers and may be associated with a higher quit rate among current smokers at 6-month follow-up than the general population. These findings ease concerns that direct-to-consumer genomic testing could lead to false reassurance and unhealthy behaviors related to smoking.
Authors: Theresa M Marteau; David P French; Simon J Griffin; A T Prevost; Stephen Sutton; Clare Watkinson; Sophie Attwood; Gareth J Hollands Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2010-10-06
Authors: Sylviane de Viron; Johan Van der Heyden; Elena Ambrosino; Marc Arbyn; Angela Brand; Herman Van Oyen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sarah M Hartz; Emily Olfson; Robert Culverhouse; Patricia Cavazos-Rehg; Li-Shiun Chen; James DuBois; Sherri Fisher; Kimberly Kaphingst; David Kaufman; Andrew Plunk; Shelina Ramnarine; Stephanie Solomon; Nancy L Saccone; Laura J Bierut Journal: Genet Med Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Nicole Senft; Maureen Sanderson; Rebecca Selove; William J Blot; Stephen King; Karen Gilliam; Suman Kundu; Mark Steinwandel; Sarah J Sternlieb; Shaneda Warren Andersen; Debra L Friedman; Erin Connors; Mary Kay Fadden; Matthew Freiberg; Quinn S Wells; Juan Canedo; Rachel F Tyndale; Robert P Young; Raewyn J Hopkins; Hilary A Tindle Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2019-06-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Denalee M O'Malley; Cindy K Blair; Alissa Greenbaum; Charles L Wiggins; Ashwani Rajput; Vi K Chiu; Anita Y Kinney Journal: J Community Genet Date: 2022-01-08
Authors: Alex T Ramsey; Michael Bray; Penina Acayo Laker; Jessica L Bourdon; Amelia Dorsey; Maia Zalik; Amanda Pietka; Patricia Salyer; Erika A Waters; Li-Shiun Chen; Laura J Bierut Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2020-03-24
Authors: Jessica L Bourdon; Amelia Dorsey; Maia Zalik; Amanda Pietka; Patricia Salyer; Michael J Bray; Laura J Bierut; Alex T Ramsey Journal: BMC Med Genomics Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 3.063
Authors: Alex T Ramsey; Jessica L Bourdon; Michael Bray; Amelia Dorsey; Maia Zalik; Amanda Pietka; Patricia Salyer; Li-Shiun Chen; Timothy B Baker; Marcus R Munafò; Laura J Bierut Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2020-09-21