Factors affecting recall of different types of personal genetic information about Alzheimer's disease risk: the REVEAL study

The Return of Biomarker Results in Research: Balancing Complexity, Precision, and Ethical Responsibility

Recent research aimed at the discovery, integration, and communication of health outcome measures (or "biomarkers") in Alzheimer's disease has raised challenging questions related to whether, how and when results from these investigations should be disclosed to research participants. Reflecting the apparent heterogeneity of many neurodegenerative diseases, biomarker or other risk factor results are often probabilistic, interactive, multi-modal, and selective. Such characteristics make it very complex to summarize and communicate to clinicians, researchers, and research participants. Whereas the format and content of academic literature is well-managed by the peer-review process, reporting individualized results to participants involves complex, sensitive, and ethical considerations. This paper describes three key factors to consider in decisions about the return of results to research participants: complexity, precision, and responsibility. The paper also presents six practical recommendations for implementing meaningful and ethical communication with research participants.

Attitudes toward pre-symptomatic screening for Alzheimer's dementia in five European countries: a comparison of family members of people with Alzheimer's dementia versus non-family members

Introduction: Pre-symptomatic screening is getting more attention in healthcare as it detects the risk for developing neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease (AD), which is very useful for treatment or prevention. AD screening could play an important role in individuals with at least one affected first-degree relative, but also without family history. As the demand for screening is rising worldwide, it is important to consider possible cross-cultural differences in attitudes toward pre-symptomatic screening in order to tailor healthcare services to the needs of each country. Objective: This study aims to investigate the attitudes of family members and non-family members of people with dementia toward pre-symptomatic screening and explore possible differences in attitudes across five European countries (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, Turkey) using translated versions of the "Perceptions regarding pRE-symptomatic Alzheimer's Disease Screening" questionnaire (PRE-ADS). Methods: The multicultural sample (N = 650) was recruited from samples that were previously used in validation studies of the translated PRE-ADS versions. The subscale "Acceptability of Screening", consisting of five PRE-ADS items to specifically explore willingness to undergo screening, was created. Ιnternal consistency was measured, and structural validity was determined using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Group comparisons were performed to investigate differences in attitudes toward pre-symptomatic AD screening regarding family history and country of origin using the PRE-ADS and the "Acceptability of Screening" mean scores. Results: Construct validity was acceptable for the PRE-ADS. Both the PRE-ADS (α = 0.76) and its subscale "Acceptability of Screening" (α = 0.90) had good internal consistency. Overall, 56.9% of the total sample expressed a positive intention toward pre-symptomatic AD screening. T-tests showed significantly higher mean scores of participants with an affected family member. An international comparison revealed differences in the "Acceptability of Screening" mean score across the five European countries. No cross-cultural differences were found for the PRE-ADS mean score after adjusting for confounding variables. Conclusion: The PRE-ADS and its subscale are reliable tools for assessing pre-symptomatic AD screening attitudes. Variations in the acceptability of screening seem to be linked to family history and cultural influences. Further research with larger samples is needed to explore underlying relationships.

Predictors of correct recall of genetic risk information among Hispanic individuals in Florida and Puerto Rico

OBJECTIVE

To identify predictors of genetic risk recall and examine whether recall influences adoption of skin cancer preventive behaviors among Hispanic individuals.

METHODS

Hispanic participants randomized to intervention arms (n = 463) of a precision prevention trial were provided MC1R risk information (average, higher) and asked to recall their risk after 3 and 9 months. Predictors of recall (correct versus did not recall/misremembered) were determined by backwards stepwise logistic regression. Intervention effects on preventive behaviors were estimated within strata of 3-month recall.

RESULTS

Age inversely predicted correct recall in both risk groups (average: OR3-months(3)= 0.97, 95%CI:0.94-1.01, OR9-months(9)= 0.96, 95%CI:0.93-0.99; higher: OR3 = 0.98, 95%CI:0.95-1.01, OR9 = 0.98, 95%CI:0.95-1.00). Education positively predicted recall among participants at average risk (OR3 =1.64, 95%CI:1.06-2.63, OR9 =1.73, 95%CI:1.12-2.81). Darker untanned skin color inversely predicted recall among participants at higher risk (OR3 =0.68, 95%CI:0.45-0.99, OR9 =0.74, 95%CI:0.50-1.09). Intervention effects for routine sunscreen use and undergoing a clinical skin exam were stronger among participants at higher risk who correctly recalled at 3 months than those who did not recall/misremembered.

CONCLUSIONS

Younger age, higher education, and lighter untanned skin color predicted correct recall. Better recall may improve skin cancer prevention outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Additional strategies are needed to boost recall among Hispanic individuals who are older, less educated, and darker-skinned.

Predictors of genetic risk recall among the participants of a randomized controlled precision prevention trial against melanoma

PURPOSE

Inherited variation in MC1R imparts low to moderate risk of melanoma. Research on genetic risk recall, factors predicting recall, and whether recall influences adoption of preventive behaviors is limited.

METHODS

Participants (n = 447) enrolled in a melanoma precision prevention trial were provided with MC1R risk information (average or higher) and after 6 and 12 months, were asked to recall their genetic risk. Predictors of recall were identified using backward stepwise selection. Intervention effects were reassessed after stratifying by recall.

RESULTS

Participants at higher risk were 2 to 3 times more likely to misremember or not recall than participants with average risk. Misremembering was almost exclusively observed among participants at higher risk. Among the participants with average risk, lower health numeracy and not completing the telephone follow-up were associated with not recalling or misremembering. Among the participants at higher risk, lower education was associated with not recalling and lower perceived comparative chance of developing melanoma was associated with misremembering. In general, participants at higher risk who correctly recalled had modestly stronger intervention effects on sun protection behaviors than those who misremembered or did not recall.

CONCLUSION

Future studies should examine different strategies to increase genetic risk recall, which may result in improved behavioral outcomes, especially among participants with lower education and health numeracy.

Spillover: The Approval of New Medications for Alzheimer's Disease Dementia Will Impact Biomarker Disclosure Among Asymptomatic Research Participants

In this article we address how the recent, and anticipated upcoming, FDA approvals of novel anti-amyloid medications to treat individuals with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia could impact disclosure of biomarker results among asymptomatic research participants. Currently, research is typically the context where an asymptomatic individual may have the option to learn their amyloid biomarker status. Asymptomatic research participants who learn their amyloid status may have questions regarding the meaning of this result and the implications for accessing a potential intervention. After outlining our rationale, we provide examples of how current educational materials used in research convey messages regarding amyloid positivity and the availability of treatments, or lack thereof. We suggest language to improve messaging, as well as strengths of current materials, in addressing these issues for research participants. Although novel medications are currently only approved for use among symptomatic individuals, their availability may have implications for disclosure among asymptomatic research participants with evidence of amyloid deposition, who may be especially interested in information on these interventions for potential prevention, or future treatment, of mild cognitive impairment or dementia due to AD.

Knowledge assessment and psychological impact of genetic counseling in people at risk for familial FTD

INTRODUCTION

The decision to undergo genetic testing for familial frontotemporal dementia (fFTD) is challenging and complex. When counseling individuals, clinicians need to know what individuals understand about the type of fFTD for which they may be at elevated risk. Unfortunately, no tools to measure understanding of fFTD exist, and no study has investigated knowledge gain from fFTD genetic counseling.

METHODS

Before and after genetic counseling, 42 asymptomatic individuals from fFTD families completed the newly developed fFTD Knowledge Assessment and Psychological Impact Questionnaire (fFTD KAPI-Q), along with affect and mood questionnaires.

RESULTS

Genetic counseling resulted in substantial knowledge gain on the fFTD KAPI-Q (average gain = 40%); those with lower pre-counseling scores gained the most. Negative affect diminished by 11%. Individuals who gained the greatest knowledge demonstrated the greatest reduction in negative affect.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic counseling was effective regardless of level of baseline knowledge and has an immediate ameliorative impact on negative affect.

A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact

Since the completion of the Human Genome Project, progress toward translating genomic research discoveries to address population health issues has been limited. Several meetings of social and behavioral scientists have outlined priority research areas where advancement of translational research could increase population health benefits of genomic discoveries. In this review, we track the pace of progress, study size and design, and focus of genomics translational research from 2012 to 2018 and its concordance with five social and behavioral science recommended priorities. We conducted a review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Guidelines for Scoping Reviews. Steps involved completing a search in five databases and a hand search of bibliographies of relevant literature. Our search (from 2012 to 2018) yielded 4,538 unique studies; 117 were included in the final analyses. Two coders extracted data including items from the PICOTS framework. Analysis included descriptive statistics to help identify trends in pace, study size and design, and translational priority area. Among the 117 studies included in our final sample, nearly half focused on genomics applications that have evidence to support translation or implementation into practice (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 applications). Common study designs were cross-sectional (40.2%) and qualitative (24.8%), with average sample sizes of 716 across all studies. Most often, studies addressed public understanding of genetics and genomics (33.3%), risk communication (29.1%), and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change (19.7%). The number of studies that address social and behavioral science priority areas is extremely limited and the pace of this research continues to lag behind basic science advances. Much of the research identified in this review is descriptive and related to public understanding, risk communication, and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change. The field has been slow to develop and evaluate public health-friendly interventions and test implementation approaches that could enable health benefits and equitable access to genomic discoveries. As the completion of the human genome approaches its 20th anniversary, full engagement of transdisciplinary efforts to address translation challenges will be required to close this gap.

Clinical implications of APOE genotyping for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk estimation: a review of the literature

Alzheimer's disease is a genetically complex neurodegenerative disorder representing the leading cause of dementia. Advances in personal genomics are increasing the public uptake of genetic susceptibility testing for complex diseases such as late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). For LOAD, the discovery of the major risk ε4 allele of the APOE gene has prompted a debate on the ethics and utility of presymptomatic (i.e., predictive) testing. Although the mechanistic contribution of APOE to disease onset remains uncertain, presymptomatic genetic testing provides a relative risk of developing LOAD. Presymptomatic testing for complex disorders, such as LOAD is much less conclusive than early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) which follows a Mendelian inheritance pattern. Given the lack of preventive strategies available for EOAD or LOAD, APOE genotyping offers limited clinical utility, thus, raising ethical and practical questions. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases or primary studies published during January 2008-January 2018 which investigated practical and ethical issues of presymptomatic APOE genotyping for LOAD risk estimation. We identified 31 articles which suggested that APOE genotyping for LOAD susceptibility provides potential benefits to at-risk patients and can guide changes in positive health-related behaviors. However, other individuals may experience test-related anxiety, depression and psychological distress. Future research should focus on developing an integrated risk assessment tool to enhance the utility of APOE genotyping. Furthermore, empirical research is required to understand actual psychological and social implications associated with testing.

A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone

Purpose

Telephone disclosure of genetic test results can improve access to services. To date, studies of its impact have focused on return of Mendelian risk information, principally hereditary cancer syndromes.

Methods

In a multisite trial of Alzheimer’s disease genetic risk disclosure, asymptomatic adults were randomized to receive test results in-person or via telephone. Primary analyses examined patient outcomes 12 months after disclosure.

Results

Data from 257 participants showed that telephone disclosure occurred 7.4 days sooner and were 30% shorter, on average, than in-person disclosure (both p<0.001). Anxiety and depression scores were well below cutoffs for clinical concern across protocols. Comparing telephone and in-person disclosure protocols, 99% CIs of mean differences were within non-inferiority margins on scales assessing anxiety, depression, and test-related distress, but inconclusive about positive impact. No differences were observed on measures of recall and subjective impact. Sub-analyses supported non-inferiority on all outcomes among APOE ε4-negative participants. Sub-analyses were inconclusive for APOE ε4-positive participants, although mean anxiety and depression scores were still well below cutoffs for clinical concern.

Conclusion

Telephone disclosure of APOE results and risk for Alzheimer’s disease is generally safe and helps providers meet demands for services, even when results identify an increased risk for disease.