Literature DB >> 9062090

The use and interpretation of commercial APC gene testing for familial adenomatous polyposis.

F M Giardiello1, J D Brensinger, G M Petersen, M C Luce, L M Hylind, J A Bacon, S V Booker, R D Parker, S R Hamilton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The use of commercially available tests for genes linked to familial cancer has aroused concern about the impact of these tests on patients. Familial adenomatous polyposis is an autosomal dominant disease caused by a germ-line mutation of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene that causes colorectal cancer if prophylactic colectomy is not performed. We evaluated the clinical use of commercial APC gene testing.
METHODS: We assessed indications for APC gene testing, whether informed consent was obtained and genetic counseling was offered before testing, and the interpretation of the results through telephone interviews with physicians and genetic counselors in a nationwide sample of 177 patients from 125 families who underwent testing during 1995.
RESULTS: Of the 177 patients tested, 83.0 percent had clinical features of familial adenomatous polyposis or were at risk for the disease-both valid indications for being tested. The appropriate strategy for presymptomatic testing was used in 79.4 percent (50 of 63 patients). Only 18.6 percent (33 of 177) received genetic counseling before the test, and only 16.9 percent (28 of 166) provided written informed consent. In 31.6 percent of the cases the physicians misinterpreted the test results. Among the patients with unconventional indications for testing, the rate of positive results was only 2.3 percent (1 of 44).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent genetic tests for familial adenomatous polyposis often received inadequate counseling and would have been given incorrectly interpreted results. Physicians should be prepared to offer genetic counseling if they order genetic tests.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9062090     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199703203361202

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  71 in total

Review 1.  The challenge of integrating genetic medicine into primary care.

Authors:  J Emery; S Hayflick
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-04-28

2.  General practitioners' views on genetic screening for common diseases.

Authors:  M A Suchard; P Yudkin; J S Sinsheimer; G H Fowler
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Screening for familial adenomatous polyposis.

Authors:  W Hyer; J M Fell
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  High frequency of BRCA1/2 germline mutations in 42 Belgian families with a small number of symptomatic subjects.

Authors:  G Goelen; E Teugels; M Bonduelle; B Neyns; J De Grève
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 6.318

5.  Direct-to-Consumer genetic testing: what are we talking about?

Authors:  Meredith Weaver; Toni I Pollin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 6.  Ethical issues raised by genetic testing with oligonucleotide microarrays.

Authors:  Wayne W Grody
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.695

7.  Multilevel research and the challenges of implementing genomic medicine.

Authors:  Muin J Khoury; Ralph J Coates; Mary L Fennell; Russell E Glasgow; Maren T Scheuner; Sheri D Schully; Marc S Williams; Steven B Clauser
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-05

8.  The prospect of genome-guided preventive medicine: a need and opportunity for genetic counselors.

Authors:  Julianne M O'Daniel
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Prenatal diagnosis and termination of pregnancy: perspectives of South African parents of children with Down syndrome.

Authors:  Chantelle Jennifer Scott; Merle Futter; Ambroise Wonkam
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-10-25

10.  A survey of genetic counselors' strategies for addressing ethical and professional challenges in practice.

Authors:  Matthew A Bower; Patricia McCarthy Veach; Dianne M Bartels; Bonnie S LeRoy
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.