Genetic testing and employer-sponsored wellness programs: An overview of current vendors, products, and practices

The Landscape of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing in Reproductive Health Contexts: An Analytical Framework of Stakeholders and Their Competing Motivations

We propose a theoretical framework that identifies (a) the different categories of stakeholders and (b) the normative values that drive their attitudes toward direct-to-consumer genetic testing, with an emphasis on the reproductive health contexts. We conducted a literature search using varied combinations of search terms, including direct-to-consumer genetic testing, decision-making, reproductive health, and policy. Using a grounded theory approach to existing literature and in combination with a narrative review, we present a systematic framework of five categories of stakeholders (i.e., genome-driven stakeholders, industry-driven stakeholders, history-driven stakeholders, value-driven stakeholders, and social justice-driven stakeholders) that shape the public's discourse. Moving beyond the dialectical ethics that have governed the public discourse, we also identify the normative values and interests that motivate different stakeholders' attitudes and decision-making through theoretical sampling under the grounded theory. We investigate the competing and conflicting values within the same category of stakeholders. For example, despite being industry-driven stakeholders, medical professionals' attitudes are driven by concerns about standards of care; in contrast, health insurance companies' concerns are centered on profit. We further explore the tensions between these stakeholders that impact their strategic alliances and pose challenges to the practices of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Finally, we examine how these stakeholders and their corresponding values may shape future development and policies of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the context of reproductive health.

Genomic testing in voluntary workplace wellness programs in the US: Evidence and challenges

BACKGROUND

Workplace genetic and/or genomic testing (wGT) is one of many options that employers can offer within the scope of voluntary workplace wellness programs, though we know little about how many employers are offering this benefit, or what kinds of testing are included.

METHODS

Our landscaping review sought to discover the prevalence and distribution of wGT within voluntary wellness programs among U.S. companies using three approaches: (1) analysis of publicly available information; (2) national surveys; and (3) interviews with company representatives.

RESULTS

In total, 50/420 (11.9%) companies we investigated had publicly available data suggesting that they offer wGT to their employees. Survey data weighted to be representative of the type and distribution of U.S. companies suggest that ~1% of U.S. companies offer wGT to their employees.

CONCLUSION

Our research found little evidence of broad uptake of wGT among U.S. companies, though information gathering was challenging.

Racial Differences in Perceptions of Genetic Wellness Programs

PURPOSE

Genetic wellness programs (GWPs) are a highly innovative workforce wellness product. Recently marketed to U.S. employers by at least 16 vendors, GWPs take advantage of low-cost DNA sequencing to detect genetic risk factors for an increasing array of diseases. The purpose of this research is to understand perceptions, concerns, and barriers related to GWPs, among employees from Black, White, and Asian backgrounds and different income levels.

APPROACH

Qualitative study with 3 focus groups (FGs).

SETTING

Employees of large high-technology companies (deemed likely early GWP adopters).

RESPONDENTS

21 individuals recruited online through User Interviews.

METHOD

FG guide developed via literature review and landscape analysis, and pre-tested. FGs led by a trained moderator and audio-recorded. Transcripts content analyzed for key themes.

RESULTS

Nearly all respondents saw potential benefits to GWP participation for themselves or their families. However, there were profound differences in perceptions of risks to GWP participation between Black and White/Asian respondents. These differences surfaced in three broad areas: privacy and discrimination risks; family impact risks; and feelings about the employer. Willingness to participate in a GWP also varied between Black employee respondents and White and Asian employee respondents (including low-income White employees). Only 27% of Black employees would participate in GWP, compared to 90% of the other employees.

CONCLUSION

Most employees appear likely to support employer adoption of GWPs. However, Black employees report significant concerns regarding participation. Addressing these concerns through program design would benefit all employees, and could increase trust and uptake of GWPs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of implementing polygenic risk score in a workplace cardiovascular disease prevention program

Background

Polygenic risk score for coronary artery disease (CAD-PRS) improves precision in assessing the risk of cardiovascular diseases and is cost-effective in preventing cardiovascular diseases in a health system and may be cost-effective in other settings and prevention programs such as workplace cardiovascular prevention programs. Workplaces provide a conducitve environment for cardiovascular prevention interventions, but the cost-effectiveness of CAD-PRS in a workplace setting remains unknown. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of integrating CAD-PRS in a workplace cardiovascular disease prevention program compared to the standard cardiovascular workplace program without CAD-PRS and no-workplace prevention program.

Methods

We developed a cohort simulation model to project health benefits (quality-adjusted life years gained) and costs over a period of 5 years in a cohort of employees with a mean age of 50 years. The model health states reflected the risk of disease (coronary artery disease and ischemic stroke) and statin prevention therapy side effects (diabetes, hemorrhagic stroke, and myopathy). We considered medical and lost productivity costs. Data were obtained from the literature, and the analysis was performed from a self-insured employer perspective with future costs and quality-adjusted life years discounted at 3% annually. Uncertainty in model parameter inputs was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Three programs were compared: (1) a workplace cardiovascular program that integrated CAD-PRS with the pooled cohort equation-a standard of care for assessing the risk of cardiovascular diseases (CardioriskSCORE); (2) a workplace cardiovascular prevention program without CAD-PRS (Standard-WHP); and (3) no-workplace health program (No-WHP). The main outcomes were total costs (US $2019), incremental costs, incremental quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Results

CardioriskSCORE lowered employer costs ($53 and $575) and improved employee quality-adjusted life years (0.001 and 0.005) per employee screened compared to Standard-WHP and No-WHP, respectively. The effectiveness of statin prevention therapy, employees' baseline cardiovascular risk, the proportion of employees that enrolled in the program, and statin adherence had the largest effect size on the incremental net monetary benefit. However, despite the variation in parameter input values, base case results remained robust.

Conclusion

Polygenic testing in a workplace cardiovascular prevention program improves employees' quality of life and simultaneously lowers health costs and productivity monetary loss for employers.

Role of Pharmacogenomics in Comprehensive Medication Management: Considerations for Employers

Rising prescription costs, poor medication adherence, and safety issues pose persistent challenges to employer-sponsored health care plans and their beneficiaries. Comprehensive medication management (CMM), a patient-centered approach to medication optimization, enriched by pharmacogenomics (PGx), has been shown to improve the efficacy and safety of pharmaceutical regimens. This has contributed to improved health care outcomes, reduced costs of treatments, better adherence, shorter durations of treatment, and fewer adverse effects from drug therapy. Despite compelling clinical and economic evidence to justify the application of CMM guided by PGx, implementation in clinical settings remains sparse; notable barriers include limited physician adoption and health insurance coverage. Ultimately, these challenges may be overcome through comprehensive programs that include clinical decision support systems and education through employer-sponsored population health management channels to the benefit of the employees, employers, health care providers, and health care systems. This article discusses benefits, considerations, and barriers of scalable PGx-enriched CMM programs in the context of self-insured employers.

Employees' Views and Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Assessment of Voluntary Workplace Genomic Testing

Employers have begun to offer voluntary workplace genomic testing (wGT) as part of employee wellness benefit programs, but few empirical studies have examined the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of wGT. To better understand employee perspectives on wGT, employees were surveyed at a large biomedical research institution. Survey respondents were presented with three hypothetical scenarios for accessing health-related genomic testing: via (1) their doctor; (2) their workplace; and 3) a commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing company. Overall, 594 employees (28%) responded to the survey. Respondents indicated a preference for genomic testing in the workplace setting (70%; 95% CI 66-74%), followed by doctor's office (54%; 95% CI 50-58%), and DTC testing (20%; 95% CI 17-24%). Prior to participating in wGT, respondents wanted to know about confidentiality of test results (79%), existence of relevant laws and policies (70%), and privacy protection (64%). Across scenarios, 92% of respondents preferred to view the test results with a genetic counselor. These preliminary results suggest that many employees are interested and even prefer genetic testing in the workplace and would prefer testing with support from genetic health professionals. Confirmation in more diverse employer settings will be needed to generalize such findings.

A Qualitative Study to Develop a Privacy and Nondiscrimination Best Practice Framework for Personalized Wellness Programs

Employers in the United States (US) increasingly offer personalized wellness products as a workplace benefit. In doing so, those employers must be cognizant of not only US law but also European Union (EU) law to the extent that the EU law applies to European immigrants or guest workers in the US. To the extent that wellness programs are implemented in either public health or employment contexts within the US and/or EU, sponsors of these programs can partner with direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies and other digital health companies to generate, collect, and process sensitive health information that are loosely or partially regulated from a privacy and nondiscrimination standpoint. Balancing claims about the benefits of wellness programs are concerns about employee health privacy and discrimination and the current unregulated nature of consumer health data. We qualitatively explored the concerns and opinions of public and legislative stakeholders in the US to determine key themes and develop privacy and nondiscrimination best practices. Key themes emerged as promoting a culture of trust and wellness. Best practices within these themes were: (1) have transparent and prominent data standards and practices, (2) uphold employee privacy and nondiscrimination standards, (3) remove penalties associated with biometric outcomes and nondisclosure of sensitive health information, (4) reward healthy behavior regardless of biometric outcomes, and (5) make program benefits accessible regardless of personal status. Employers, DTC genetic testing companies, policymakers, and stakeholders broadly should consider these themes and best practices in the current absence of broad regulations on nondiscriminatory workplace wellness programs.

Genetic testing and employer-sponsored wellness programs: An overview of current vendors, products, and practices

BACKGROUND

Employer-sponsored corporate wellness programs have spread despite limited evidence of effectiveness in improving health or reducing costs. Some programs have offered genetic testing as a benefit to employees, but little is known about this practice.

METHODS

In December 2019, we conducted a systematic Google search to identify vendors offering corporate wellness programs involving genetics. We performed qualitative content analysis of publicly available information about the vendors' products and practices disclosed on their websites.

RESULTS

Fifteen vendors were identified. Details regarding genetic testing offered within wellness programs were difficult to decipher from vendors' websites, including which specific products were included. No evidence was provided to support vendor claimed improvements in employer costs, employee health, and job performance. Only half offered health and genetic counseling services. Most vendors were ambiguous regarding data sharing. Disclaimer language was included in vendors' stated risks and limitations, ostensibly to avoid oversight and liability.

CONCLUSION

We found a lack of transparency among corporate wellness program vendors, underscoring challenges that stakeholders encounter when trying to assess (a) how such programs are using genetics, (b) the potential benefits of such applications, and (c) the adequacy of protections to ensure scientific evidence support any health claims and genetic nondiscrimination.