Developing the blueprint for a genetic testing registry

Molecular Genetic Techniques in Biomarker Analysis Relevant for Drugs Centrally Approved in Europe

On the basis of scientific evidence, information on the option, recommendation or requirement to test for pharmacogenetic or pharmacogenomic biomarkers is incorporated in the Summary of Product Characteristics of an increasing number of drugs in Europe. A screening of the Genetic Testing Registry (GTR) showed that a variety of molecular genetic testing methods is currently offered worldwide in testing services with regard to according drugs and biomarkers. Thereby, among the methodology indicated in the screened GTR category ‘Molecular Genetics’, next-generation sequencing is applied for identification of the largest proportion of evaluated biomarkers that are relevant for therapeutic management of centrally approved drugs in Europe. However, sufficient information on regulatory clearances, clinical utility, analytical and clinical validity of applied methods is rarely provided.

Public reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic health tests: A comparison across the US, UK, Japan and Australia

While direct to consumer health-related genetic testing (DTCGT) has potential to provide accessible genetic information and empower individuals to make informed healthcare decisions, it attracts concern associated with regulatory gaps, clinical utility and potential for harm. Understanding public reactions to DTCGT is vital to facilitate considered regulatory, health care and consumer protection strategies. Yet little is known, particularly outside the dominant US market, about how the general public view and might engage with DTCGT outside traditional health care systems. This paper addresses this knowledge gap with the first empirical study to investigate general public views across four countries, each at different stages of market development. US (n = 1000), UK (n = 1014), Japanese (n = 1018) and Australian (n = 1000) respondents completed an online experimental survey assessing comprehension, risk perceptions, and potential psychological and behavioural outcomes by type of test (disease pre-disposition and drug sensitivity), severity, lifestyle factors, and family history. Results showed generally low awareness and intention to purchase across countries, highest in the US and lowest in Japan. Results also showed clear preference for within-country purchases (less in Japan), with reports returned via doctors far more important in Japan. All respondents were more likely to act on test results, where there was higher genetic or lifestyle risk of developing a disease. Statistical comparisons of demographic and health-related variables across countries point to the need for further analyses designed to explain much needed cross-cultural, cross-health care system and developed versus developing market differences.

Genenames.org: the HGNC resources in 2015

The HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) based at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) assigns unique symbols and names to human genes. To date the HGNC have assigned over 39 000 gene names and, representing an increase of over 5000 entries in the past two years. As well as increasing the size of our database, we have continued redesigning our website http://www.genenames.org and have modified, updated and improved many aspects of the site including a faster and more powerful search, a vastly improved HCOP tool and a REST service to increase the number of ways users can retrieve our data. This article provides an overview of our current online data and resources, and highlights the changes we have made in recent years.

The NIH genetic testing registry: a new, centralized database of genetic tests to enable access to comprehensive information and improve transparency

The National Institutes of Health Genetic Testing Registry (GTR; available online at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gtr/) maintains comprehensive information about testing offered worldwide for disorders with a genetic basis. Information is voluntarily submitted by test providers. The database provides details of each test (e.g. its purpose, target populations, methods, what it measures, analytical validity, clinical validity, clinical utility, ordering information) and laboratory (e.g. location, contact information, certifications and licenses). Each test is assigned a stable identifier of the format GTR000000000, which is versioned when the submitter updates information. Data submitted by test providers are integrated with basic information maintained in National Center for Biotechnology Information’s databases and presented on the web and through FTP (ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/pub/GTR/_README.html).

Consensus: a framework for evaluation of uncertain gene variants in laboratory test reporting

Accurate interpretation of gene testing is a key component in customizing patient therapy. Where confirming evidence for a gene variant is lacking, computational prediction may be employed. A standardized framework, however, does not yet exist for quantitative evaluation of disease association for uncertain or novel gene variants in an objective manner. Here, complementary predictors for missense gene variants were incorporated into a weighted Consensus framework that includes calculated reference intervals from known disease outcomes. Data visualization for clinical reporting is also discussed.

Healthcare payers: a gate or translational bridge to personalized medicine?

Healthcare payers represent stakeholders who can act as either a bridge or a gate to the translation of personalized medicine into routine clinical practice. To date, the slow realization of the promise of personalized medicine has been partly attributable to the lack of clear evidence supporting the clinical utility of genetic and genomic tests and the lag in development of clinical guidelines for the use and interpretation of tests. These factors, along with a paucity of clear guidance from healthcare payers and clinical experience with genomic tests, serve as impediments to timely and consistent reimbursement decisions. The design of alternative strategies for collaborative evidence-generation, clinical decision support and educational initiatives for healthcare providers, patients and the payers themselves are critical needs to achieve the full benefit of personalized medicine in day-to-day healthcare settings.

Utility of gene-specific algorithms for predicting pathogenicity of uncertain gene variants

The rapid advance of gene sequencing technologies has produced an unprecedented rate of discovery of genome variation in humans. A growing number of authoritative clinical repositories archive gene variants and disease phenotypes, yet there are currently many more gene variants that lack clear annotation or disease association. To date, there has been very limited coverage of gene-specific predictors in the literature. Here the evaluation is presented of "gene-specific" predictor models based on a naïve Bayesian classifier for 20 gene-disease datasets, containing 3986 variants with clinically characterized patient conditions. The utility of gene-specific prediction is then compared with "all-gene" generalized prediction and also with existing popular predictors. Gene-specific computational prediction models derived from clinically curated gene variant disease datasets often outperform established generalized algorithms for novel and uncertain gene variants.

Regulating direct-to-consumer genetic tests: what is all the fuss about?

The number of genetic tests available direct-to-consumer has burgeoned over the last few years, prompting numerous calls for tighter regulation of these services. However, there is a lack of consensus about the most appropriate and achievable level of regulation, particularly given the global nature of the market. By consideration of potential for direct and indirect harms caused by genetic susceptibility or genomic profiling tests, in this study we offer an overarching framework that we believe to be feasible for the regulation of direct-to-consumer genetic tests and likely to be relevant to other forms of predictive testing. We suggest that just five key requirements would adequately protect the consumer: a proportionate set of consent procedures; formal laboratory accreditation; evidence of a valid gene-disease association; appropriately qualified staff to interpret the test result; and consumer protection legislation to prevent false or misleading claims.

The future of direct-to-consumer clinical genetic tests

In light of the meeting of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in March 2011 to discuss the regulation of clinical direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests, we have invited five experts to consider the best means of overseeing the ordering and interpretation of these tests. Should these tests be regulated? If so, who, if anyone, should communicate results to consumers?

PLoS currents: evidence on genomic tests - At the crossroads of translation

Evidence on Genomic Tests is an open access publication option for communicating high-quality, scientific information that is needed to evaluate health applications of genomic research. By using Google’s knol platform, we aim to reduce conventional barriers to sharing, updating, and accessing the results of knowledge synthesis and to increase the benefits to authors and users alike.

Informational content, literacy demands, and usability of websites offering health-related genetic tests directly to consumers

PURPOSE

As direct-to-consumer genetic testing becomes more available, a diverse group of consumers, including those with limited health literacy, may consider testing. In light of concerns raised about direct-to-consumer genetic testing, this study sought to critically examine whether the informational content, literacy demands, and usability of health-related direct-to-consumer websites met existing recommendations.

METHODS

A content analysis was performed on 29 health-related direct-to-consumer websites. Two coders independently evaluated each website for informational content (e.g., benefits, limitations), literacy demands (e.g., reading level), and usability (e.g., ease of navigation).

RESULTS

Most sites presented health conditions and some markers for which they tested, benefits of testing, a description of the testing process, and their privacy policy. Fewer cited scientific literature, explained test limitations, or provided an opportunity to consult a health professional. Key informational content was difficult to locate on most sites. Few sites gave sample disease risk estimates or used common language and explained technical terms consistently. Average reading level was grade 15.

CONCLUSION

The quality of informational content, literacy demands, and usability across health-related direct-to-consumer websites varied widely. Many users would struggle to find and understand the important information. For consumers to better understand the content on these sites and evaluate the meaning of the tests for their health, sites should lower the demands placed on users by distilling and prioritizing the key informational content while simultaneously attending to the reading level and usability elements. In the absence of regulation compelling such changes, government agencies or professional organizations may need to increase consumer and provider awareness of these issues.

Integrating genomic-based clinical decision support into electronic health records

There is a growing consensus that the first and most necessary step to improving the efficiency, cost–effectiveness and quality of healthcare systems can be achieved through the implementation of interoperable patient-centric electronic health record (EHR) systems across hospitals and clinics. Targeted therapeutics (including screening, prevention and disease management) through EHR-based clinical decision support delivery may drive both the acceptance and adoption of EHR systems by providing personalized information at the point-of-care. The realization of targeted therapeutics will depend on the resolution of current political, ethical, socioeconomical and technical challenges surrounding EHR implementation efforts. There is a growing need for broad-based consensus initiatives to foster an essential level of standardization for EHRs. The timeliness of these issues is underlined by the rapid emergence of private sector efforts in this potentially lucrative field, from direct-to-consumer testing to Google-, or Microsoft-owned personal health data. This review discusses the potential value for adopting healthcare technology, with a focus on personalized medicine, and highlights the challenges that remain to achieve this.

Advocacy in personalized medicine: a developing strength in a complex space

Multiple stakeholders play a role in the adoption of personalized medicine, including payers, patients, policy makers, diagnostic manufacturers and providers, and clinicians. These stakeholders span multiple positions, institutions and points of view, and are interested in making sure that each diagnostic launch covers a particular, sometimes contradictory, market need. A growing number of advocacy groups have emerged to unify these stakeholders in this increasingly complex marketplace. This perspective will identify examples of these advocacy efforts in personalized medicine today. It will discuss how far these groups have been able to go, what they are currently pursuing and how they and others can continue to work to move personalized medicine from concept to reality.