Direct-to-Consumer Marketing of Genetic Tests: Access Does Not Reflect Clinical Utility

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing in South Africa: Stumbling Over the First Legal Hurdle?

Despite the growing popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic testing, there is minimal South African literature on the topic. The limited available research suggests that direct-to-consumer genetic testing is unregulated. However, we suggest that direct-to-consumer genetic testing is indeed regulated, and unusually so. The first step in the process - the collection of a saliva sample by consumers themselves - is unlawful on a plain reading of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and the Regulations Relating to the Use of Human Biological Material. This is because these statutes require that certain healthcare professionals must remove saliva for genetic testing. Yet, on closer analysis, such an apparent ban on the self-collection of saliva is neither aligned with a purposive interpretation of the relevant legislation, nor would it survive constitutional scrutiny - as it impedes an individual's autonomy. It is concluded that, contrary to a plain reading of the relevant statutes, individuals can lawfully collect their own saliva for direct-to-consumer genetic testing. To provide legal clarity we recommend that the relevant provisions of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and Regulations Relating to the Use of Human Biological the Material be amended to allow individuals to collect their own saliva samples.

The Commercialization of Genetic Research: A Pilot Study

With the development of molecular genetics, the field of personalized medicine based on genetic data has been growing at a phenomenal pace. Genetic tests can identify health risks, ancestry, and genealogy, as well as the prediction of drug responses. However, very limited research exists about the marketing practices of companies, which promote and sell DNA ancestry and health-related genetic tests directly to the public.

Aim. To evaluate the awareness and attitude about genetic testing in the population of a large industrial city in Russia (on the example of Irkutsk).

Materials and methods. A total of 305 respondents – 265 of them were students of higher educational institutions of Irkutsk. The study was conducted on condition of anonymity. The questionnaire was available on the Internet on the basis of the Google Forms service. All basic concepts were explained to the participants during the survey.

Results. 94.1 % are interested in conducting genetic testing on a commercial basis. Of the total number of survey participants, 72.8 % expressed a desire to undergo the analysis “Hereditary predisposition to diseases”, 61 % – “Monogenic diseases”, 52.1 % – “Ethno”. In addition, out of the total number of respondents surveyed, 36.7 % want to undergo genetic testing for research: features of metabolism and food intolerance “Diet”, 22 % – susceptibility to injuries and speed of recovery of physical form “Sport”, 18 % – to hereditarily determined susceptibility to drugs “Pharmacy”. It follows from the answers that the greatest interest among the surveyed people is the determination of predisposition to cardiovascular diseases – 72.5 %, to Alzheimer’s disease – 48.3 % and diabetes mellitus – 40.3 %.

Conclusion. The results obtained indicate an interest in the study of predisposition to cardiovascular and neurodegenerative diseases. There is a high need to analyze the assessment of the clinical usefulness of genetic research, to assess the impact of research results on human behavior and the system of regulation of genetic testing in healthcare in general. 

Attitudes towards Personal Genomics and Sharing of Genetic Data among Older Swiss Adults: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the willingness of older Swiss adults to share genetic data for research purposes and to investigate factors that might impact their willingness to share data.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 40 participants (19 male and 21 female) aged between 67 and 92 years, between December 2013 and April 2014 attending the Seniorenuniversität Zürich, Switzerland. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. For the analysis of the interviews, an initial coding scheme was developed, refined over time, and applied afterwards to all interviews.

RESULTS

The majority of participants were in favor of placing genetic data to research's disposal. Participant's motivations to share data were mainly driven by altruistic reasons and by contributing to the greater good. Furthermore, several factors which might impact the willingness to share data such as sharing data with private companies, generational differences, differences between sharing genetic data or health data, and sharing due to financial incentives were highlighted. Last, some participants indicated concerns regarding data sharing such as misuse of data, the fear of becoming a transparent citizen, and data safety. However, 20% of the participants express confidence in data protection. Even participants who were skeptical in the beginning of the interviews admitted the benefits of data sharing.

DISCUSSION

Overall, this study suggests older citizens are willing to share their data for research purposes. However, most of them will only contribute if their data is appropriately protected and if they trust the research institution to use the shared data responsibly. More transparency and detailed information regarding the data usage are urgently needed. There is a great need to increase the engagement of older adults in research since they present a large segment of our society - one which is often underexamined in research.

CONCLUSION

Increased focus on general public engagement, especially of older adults, in scientific research activities known as "citizen science" is needed to further strengthen the uptake of personalized medicine.

Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing and cancer risk prediction

The last several years has witnessed an explosion in genomics, with the advent of genome-wide association studies revealing hundreds of DNA variants significantly associated with most common diseases, including cancer. On the heels of these scientific advances came the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing industry. Genome-wide scans for disease have been marketed and sold directly to the public, without the involvement of a health care provider. Unlike genetic testing for mutations in known hereditary cancer susceptibility genes such as BRCA1/2, these genomic profiles examine DNA variants, which typically have a minimal risk impact, and account for only a fraction of the heritable component of cancer. Furthermore, risk information provided to consumers does not account for family history or other known risk factors. The clinical validity and utility of personal genome scans for disease risk prediction remain for the most part unestablished, although some argue lack of evidence of harm and the possibility that positive impacts on health behaviors or genetic awareness may result from consumer use. The DTC genetic testing industry has sparked significant controversy not only among the scientific community, but also among professional societies and government agencies.In this review, we present some of the history and methodological considerations of DTC genomic profiling, with a focus on cancer risk prediction. The literature regarding consumer awareness and utilization is explored, including understanding, expectations, and behavioral and psychological responses to DTC genomic risk prediction. Primary care provider and genetic professional knowledge and perceptions of DTC genomic profiling are also addressed. Ethical and scientific controversy surrounding the DTC genetic testing industry is presented, along with policy recommendations, regulatory actions, and the changing landscape of the DTC genetic testing market in response. Although our understanding of the human genome holds much promise in the realm of cancer prevention and treatment, DTC genomic profiling for cancer risk prediction is unlikely in its current form to have any significant impact on the health of the public. Time will tell if the next venture in genomic medicine, whole genome sequencing, will be accompanied by the translational research and emphasis on public/provider education required to ensure its successful application toward reducing the burden of cancer at a population level.

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

Over the last couple of years, many commercial companies, the majority of which are based in the USA, have been advertising and offering direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing services outside of the established health care system, and often without any involvement from a health care professional. In the last year, however, a number of DTC genetic testing companies have changed their provision model such that consumers must now contact a health care professional before being able to order the genetic testing service. In discussing the advent of this new model of service provision, this article also reviews the ethical and social issues surrounding DTC genetic testing and addresses the potential motivations for change, some barriers to achieving truly appropriate medical supervision and the present reality of DTC genetic testing for some psychiatric and neurological disorders. Since the advent of these commercial activities, critics have pointed a finger at the lack of medical supervision surrounding these services. The discussion herein, however, reveals how difficult it may be, despite the addition of a physician, to actually achieve adequate medical supervision within the present context of DTC genetic testing.

An exploration of genetic health professionals' experience with direct-to-consumer genetic testing in their clinical practice

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) allows individuals to obtain genetic tests directly from companies without necessarily involving health professionals. This study explores genetic health professionals' opinions of health-related DTC-GT and the reported frequency of individuals presenting to clinical genetics services after undertaking testing. Genetic counsellors and clinical geneticists, members of the Human Genetics Society of Australasia, completed an online survey in mid 2011. The 130 genetic counsellors (estimated response fraction=43%) and 38 clinical geneticists (estimated response fraction=46%) had mixed opinions regarding DTC-GT, with only 7% confident in accurately interpreting and explaining DTC-GT results. Nineteen respondents (11%) reported one or more client(s) referred to them after undertaking DTC-GT. Descriptions of 25 clients were extracted from responses, and respondents reported that all clients were concerned for the health of either themselves or family members. Most clients presented to genetic clinics specifically as a result of their DTC-GT (96%) and were self or GP referred (92%). Respondents perceived that their clients typically undertook DTC-GT because they wanted to identify monogenic conditions, including carrier testing and/or know their susceptibility or predisposition for complex conditions (88%). The majority of clients needed help interpreting DTC-GT results (80%), however in general were not questioning the validity of their DTC-GT results (92%) nor seeking further genetic testing (84%). Currently, DTC-GT is not a major reason for referral to clinical genetics services in Australia and New Zealand and the majority of genetic health professionals lack confidence in being able to accurately interpret and explain DTC-GT results.

Perception of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and direct-to-consumer advertising of genetic tests among members of a large managed care organization

This small qualitative study was designed to determine possible attitudes toward and understanding of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing among members of a large managed care organization, and whether differences might exist between population groups. Ten focus groups were conducted by population type (high risk, White, African American, Hispanic/Latino) to determine knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about DTC genetics. Focus group transcripts were coded for attitudes toward and framing of the issue. Study results found participants were negative towards DTC genetic testing but they also found some aspects useful. Participants framed the issue mainly in terms of disease prevention and uncertainty of reaction to results, with some variation between population types. The concept of an "Informed Consumer," or process to seek information when the issue becomes personally relevant, emerged. This concept suggests that individuals may seek additional assistance to make personally-appropriate choices when faced with a DTC advertisement or genetic test.

Educational needs of primary care physicians regarding direct-to-consumer genetic testing

To assess the educational needs of North Carolina primary care physicians (PCPs) about direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, surveys were mailed to 2,402 family and internal medicine providers in North Carolina. Out of 382 respondents, 323 (85%) felt unprepared to answer patient questions and 282 (74%) reported wanting to learn about DTC genetic testing. A total of 148 (39%) were aware of DTC genetic testing. Among these, 63 (43%) thought DTC genetic testing was clinically useful. PCPs who felt either unprepared to answer patient questions (OR = 0.354, p = 0.01) or that DTC genetic testing was clinically useful (OR = 5.783, p = 0.00) were more likely to want to learn about DTC genetic testing. PCPs are interested in learning about DTC genetic testing, but are mostly unaware of DTC testing and feel unprepared to help patients with DTC testing results. Familiar and trusted channels that provide the information and tools PCPs need to help answer patient's questions and manage their care should be used when creating educational programs.