Effect of Alzheimer disease genetic risk disclosure on dietary supplement use

Does personalised nutrition advice based on apolipoprotein E and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase genotype affect dietary behaviour?

Background: Dietary intake is linked to numerous modifiable risk factors of cardiovascular disease. Current dietary recommendations in the UK to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease are not being met. A genotype-based personalised approach to dietary recommendations may motivate individuals to make positive changes in their dietary behaviour. Aim: To determine the effect of a personalised nutrition intervention, based on apolipoprotein E (ApoE, rs7412; rs429358) and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR, rs1801133) genotype, on reported dietary intake of saturated fat and folate in participants informed of a risk genotype compared to those informed of non-risk genotype. Methods: Baseline data (n = 99) were collected to determine genotype (non-risk vs risk), dietary intake and cardiovascular risk (Q-Risk®2 cardiovascular risk calculator). Participants were provided with personalised nutrition advice via email based on their ApoE and MTHFR genotype and reported intake of folate and saturated fat. After 10 days, dietary intake data were reported for a second time. Results: Personalised nutrition advice led to favourable dietary changes, irrespective of genotype, in participants who were not meeting dietary recommendations at baseline for saturated fat (p < 0.001) and folate (p = 0.002). Only participants who were informed of a risk ApoE genotype met saturated fat recommendations following personalised nutrition advice. Conclusion: Incorporation of genotype-based personalised nutrition advice in a diet behaviour intervention may elicit favourable changes in dietary behaviour in participants informed of a risk genotype. Participants informed of a non-risk genotype also respond to personalised nutrition advice favourably but to a lesser extent.

Biomarker-Based Risk Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Psychosocial, Ethical, and Legal Aspects

Background: Today, a growing number of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) wish to assess their risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease (AD) dementia. The expectations as well as the effects on quality of life (QoL) in MCI patients and their close others through biomarker-based dementia risk estimation are not well studied. Objective: The PreDADQoL project aims at providing empirical data on effects of such prediction on QoL and at developing an ethical and legal framework of biomarker-based dementia risk estimation in MCI. Methods: In the empirical study, 100 MCI-patients and their close others will be recruited from two sites (Germany and Spain). They receive standardized counselling on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker-based prediction of AD dementia and a risk disclosure based on their AD biomarker status. A mixed methods approach will be applied to assess outcomes. Results: The pilot-study yielded a specification of the research topics and newly developed questionnaires for the main assessment. Within this binational quantitative and qualitative study, data on attitudes and expectations toward AD risk prediction, QoL, risk communication, coping strategies, mental health, lifestyle changes, and healthcare resource utilization will be obtained. Together with the normative part of the project, an empirically informed ethical and legal framework for biomarker-based dementia risk estimation will be developed. Conclusion: The empirical research of the PreDADQoL study together with the ethical and legal considerations and implications will help to improve the process of counselling and risk disclosure and thereby positively affect QoL and health of MCI-patients and their close others in the context of biomarker-based dementia risk estimation.

Disclosing Genetic Risk of Alzheimer's Disease to Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults: Findings from the Study of Knowledge and Reactions to APOE Testing (SOKRATES II)

BACKGROUND

Current practice guidelines recommend against Apolipoprotein E (APOE) testing. However, advances in Alzheimer's disease (AD) research and care may soon change this.

OBJECTIVE

To examine longitudinally the experience of learning an APOE result and, if an ɛ4 carrier, taking a disease-specific treatment to reduce one's risk of AD.

METHODS

Fifty ɛ4 carriers and 20 non-carriers completed semi-structured interviews 3 months and 15 months after APOE disclosure.

RESULTS

Individuals generally understand their APOE results. While non-carriers felt relief, ɛ4 carriers often described themselves as disappointed by their result but nevertheless glad to know. Carriers expressed concerns about stigma and discrimination, including in the workplace. Carriers adopted new health behaviors at higher rates than non-carriers and revised their future plans to account for their increased risk of AD. Individuals participating in research were hopeful that their participation would help them or others; individuals who learned they were at increased risk for AD but who could not participate in research were disappointed.

CONCLUSION

Providers disclosing APOE results should be sensitive to how APOE results shape emotions, self-perceptions, and attitudes about memory; raise concerns about stigma and discrimination in personal and professional relationships; influence health behaviors and decision-making; and can have follow-on effects on family members.

Can a Lifestyle Genomics Intervention Motivate Patients to Engage in Greater Physical Activity than a Population-Based Intervention? Results from the NOW Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Lifestyle genomics (LGx) is a science that explores interactions between genetic variation, lifestyle components such as physical activity (PA), and subsequent health- and performance-related outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether an LGx intervention could motivate enhanced engagement in PA to a greater extent than a population-based intervention.

METHODS

In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, participants received either the standard, population-based Group Lifestyle BalanceTM (GLB) program intervention or the GLB program in addition to the provision of LGx information and advice (GLB + LGx). Participants (n = 140) completed a 7-day PA recall at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Data from the PA recalls were used to calculate metabolic equivalents (METs), a measure of energy expenditure. Statistical analyses included split plot analyses of covariance and binary logistic regression (generalized linear models). Differences in leisure time PA weekly METs, weekly minutes of moderate + high-intensity PA, and adherence to PA guidelines were compared between groups (GLB and GLB + LGx) across the 4 time points.

RESULTS

Weekly METs were significantly higher in the GLB + LGx group (1,114.7 ± 141.9; 95% CI 831.5-1,397.8) compared to the standard GLB group (621.6 ± 141.9 MET/week; 95% CI 338.4-904.8) at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.01). All other results were non-significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The provision of an LGx intervention resulted in a greater weekly leisure time PA energy expenditure after the 6-month follow-up. Future research should determine how this could be sustained over the long-term.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03015012.

Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges

Advances in genomic science are informing an expansion of genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases, which can be used for diagnostic and predictive purposes and performed in both medical and consumer genomics settings. Such testing-which is often for severe and incurable conditions like Huntington's, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's diseases-raises important ethical and health communication challenges. This review addresses such challenges in the contexts of clinical, research, and direct-to-consumer genetic testing; these include informed consent, risk estimation and communication, potential benefits and psychosocial harms of genetic information (e.g., genetic discrimination), access to services, education and workforce needs, and health policies. The review also highlights future areas of likely growth in the field, including polygenic risk scores, use of genetic testing in clinical trials, and return of individual research results.

Predictive Genetic Counseling for Neurodegenerative Diseases: Past, Present, and Future

Predictive genetic counseling for neurodegenerative diseases commenced with Huntington's disease (HD). Because the psychological issues and outcomes have been best studied in HD, the HD genetic counseling and testing protocol is still accepted as the gold standard for genetic counseling for these diseases. Yet, advances in genomic technology have produced an abundance of new information about the genetics of diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Parkinson's disease. The resulting expansion of genetic tests together with the availability of direct-to-consumer testing and clinical trials for treatment of these diseases present new ethical and practical issues requiring modifications to the protocol for HD counseling and new demands on both physicians and genetic counselors. This work reviews the history of genetic counseling for neurodegenerative diseases, its current practice, and the future direction of genetic counseling for these conditions.

Prevention of dementia presents a potentially critical platform for improvement of long-term public health

With the aging of the population, Alzheimer disease (AD) has become an epidemic and a major public health threat. Hundreds of molecules tested in clinical trials in the last decade to treat AD have failed, moving the field to examine the clinical and neurobiological value of prevention of cognitive decline and AD. This short review describes recently finished or currently ongoing clinical trials for prevention of AD, both their main outcomes and secondary outcomes. In addition, the potential modifying effects of age and of genetics as important factors that may affect the design of future clinical trials is discussed. Finally, we discuss the development of new molecular imaging and of digital technologies as a means to disclosure of dementia-related risk and disease progress, and their potential importance as contributors to adherence to healthy lifestyle for the prevention or delay of AD onset.

Impacts of apolipoprotein E disclosure on healthy Asian older adults: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

The apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype provides information about Alzheimer's disease risk, yet genotype disclosure is discouraged due to concerns about possible distress. This is the first study investigating the psychological and behavioral impacts that genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease has in an Asian population.

METHODS

From March 2016 to November 2017, we ran a prospective cohort study at Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School. 280 healthy Chinese elderly filled in questionnaires that measured psychological symptoms and health behaviors, 1 week before and 6 weeks after APOE genotype disclosure. Responses from ε4-positive subjects (associated with greater Alzheimer's disease risk) were compared to responses from ε4-negative subjects.

RESULTS

ε4 presence was not significantly associated with anxiety (p = 0.09) or depression (p = 0.25). No associations were found for changes to diet (p = 0.36), dietary supplements consumption (p = 0.90), physical activity (p = 0.15), or cognitive activity (p = 0.18).

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence to suggest that disclosure of APOE to Asian populations was associated with any short-term adverse psychological or behavioral impacts.

A Systematic Review of the Psychological Implications of Genetic Testing: A Comparative Analysis Among Cardiovascular, Neurodegenerative and Cancer Diseases

Background: Genetic testing is performed for different purposes, such as identifying carriers, predicting a disease onset in presymptomatic individuals or confirming a diagnosis. However, these tests may have notable psychological effects, such as generating anxiety and depression. These effects may depend on people's perception of risk, severity, and controllability of the disease; and the availability of treatments. To date, there are no reports that analyze these factors specifically, and their role in influencing genetic test users' experience. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the psychological implication of undergoing genetic testing for cardiovascular, neurodegenerative and cancer diseases. Articles were searched on PubMed, Google Scholar, and PsychInfo. Results: 47 studies were included, 9 concerning cardiovascular disease, 18 neurodegenerative disorders, and 20 for cancer disease. According to the reviewed studies, people experience no significant increase in distress and anxiety, or adverse impacts on quality of life, except the Huntington disease, which is characterized by depressive symptoms, suicidal ideations, and hopelessness in gene carriers. People tend to consider genetic tests as valid information to take important preventive decisions. Genetic risk for cardiovascular disease is perceived to be manageable; genetic analysis for some neurodegenerative diseases (e.g., Alzheimer) or cancer (breast cancer in particular) is considered useful because the problem could be addressed in advance with preventive behaviors. Conclusions: Genetic tests should be proposed along with proper psychological support and counseling focused on users' genetic health literacy; perception of risk, beliefs about disease controllability, in order to foster fruitful medical decisions.

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.

Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Advances in genomewide association studies have made possible the return of genetic risk results for complex diseases. Two concerns about these results are (a) negative psychological consequences and (b) viewing probabilistic results as deterministic, leading to misinterpretation and inappropriate decisions. The present study evaluates these concerns through a meta-analytic review of existing literature.

METHOD

Seventeen genetic testing studies of complex disease, including 1,171 participants and reporting 195 effects, 104 of which were unadjusted for covariates, were meta-analyzed under a random effects model. Diseases included Alzheimer's, cardiovascular and coronary heart disease, lung cancer, melanoma, thrombophilia, and type II diabetes. Six domains of behavioral-psychological reactions were examined.

RESULTS

Carriers showed significantly increased self-reported behavior change compared to noncarriers when assessed 6 months or later after results return (Hedges's g = .36, p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Return of genetic testing results for complex disease does not strongly impact self-reported negative behavior or psychological function of at-risk individuals. Return of results does appear to moderately increase self-reported healthy behavior in carriers, although research on objectively observed behavior change is needed. This is a growing area of research, with preliminary results suggesting potential positive implications of genetic testing for complex disease on behavior change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

A Systematic Review of Genetic Testing and Lifestyle Behaviour Change: Are We Using High-Quality Genetic Interventions and Considering Behaviour Change Theory?

BACKGROUND

Studying the impact of genetic testing interventions on lifestyle behaviour change has been a priority area of research in recent years. Substantial heterogeneity exists in the results and conclusions of this literature, which has yet to be explained using validated behaviour change theory and an assessment of the quality of genetic interventions. The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) helps to explain key contributors to behaviour change. It has been hypothesized that personalization could be added to this theory to help predict changes in health behaviours.

PURPOSE

This systematic review provides a detailed, comprehensive identification, assessment, and summary of primary research articles pertaining to lifestyle behaviour change (nutrition, physical activity, sleep, and smoking) resulting from genetic testing interventions. The present review further aims to provide in-depth analyses of studies conducted to date within the context of the TPB and the quality of genetic interventions provided to participants while aiming to determine whether or not genetic testing facilitates changes in lifestyle habits. This review is timely in light of a recently published "call-to-action" paper, highlighting the need to incorporate the TPB into personalized healthcare behaviour change research.

METHODS

Three bibliographic databases, one key website, and article reference lists were searched for relevant primary research articles. The PRISMA Flow Diagram and PRISMA Checklist were used to guide the search strategy and manuscript preparation. Out of 32,783 titles retrieved, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. Three quality assessments were conducted and included: (1) risk of bias, (2) quality of genetic interventions, and (3) consideration of theoretical underpinnings - primarily the TPB.

RESULTS

Risk of bias in studies was overall rated to be "fair." Consideration of the TPB was "poor," with no study making reference to this validated theory. While some studies (n = 11; 42%) made reference to other behaviour change theories, these theories were generally mentioned briefly, and were not thoroughly incorporated into the study design or analyses. The genetic interventions provided to participants were overall of "poor" quality. However, a separate analysis of studies using controlled intervention research methods demonstrated the use of higher-quality genetic interventions (overall rated to be "fair"). The provision of actionable recommendations informed by genetic testing was more likely to facilitate behaviour change than the provision of genetic information without actionable lifestyle recommendations. Several studies of good quality demonstrated changes in lifestyle habits arising from the provision of genetic interventions. The most promising lifestyle changes were changes in nutrition.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to facilitate behaviour change using genetic testing as the catalyst. Future research should ensure that high-quality genetic interventions are provided to participants, and should consider validated theories such as the TPB in their study design and analyses. Further recommendations for future research are provided.

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.

Behavioural changes, sharing behaviour and psychological responses after receiving direct-to-consumer genetic test results: a systematic review and meta-analysis

It has been hypothesised that direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GTs) could stimulate health behaviour change. However, genetic testing may also lead to anxiety and distress or unnecessarily burden the health care system. The aim is to review and meta-analyse the effects of DTC-GT on (1) behaviour change, (2) psychological response and (3) medical consumption. A systematic literature search was performed in three databases, using "direct-to-consumer genetic testing" as a key search term. Random effects meta-analyses were performed when at least two comparable outcomes were available. After selection, 19 articles were included involving 11 unique studies. Seven studies involved actual consumers who paid the retail price, whereas four included participants who received free genetic testing as part of a research trial (non-actual consumers). In meta-analysis, 23% had a positive lifestyle change. More specifically, improved dietary and exercise practices were both reported by 12%, whereas 19% quit smoking. Seven percent of participants had subsequent preventive checks. Thirty-three percent shared their results with any health care professional and 50% with family and/or friends. Sub-analyses show that behaviour change was more prevalent among non-actual consumers, whereas sharing was more prevalent among actual consumers. Results on psychological responses showed that anxiety, distress and worry were low or absent and that the effect faded with time. DTC-GT has potential to be effective as a health intervention, but the right audience needs to be addressed with tailored follow-up. Research is needed to identify consumers who do and do not change behaviour or experience adverse psychological responses.

Knowing your genes: does this impact behaviour change?

It is postulated that knowledge of genotype may be more powerful than other types of personalised information in terms of motivating behaviour change. However, there is also a danger that disclosure of genetic risk may promote a fatalistic attitude and demotivate individuals. The original concept of personalised nutrition (PN) focused on genotype-based tailored dietary advice; however, PN can also be delivered based on assessment of dietary intake and phenotypic measures. Whilst dietitians currently provide PN advice based on diet and phenotype, genotype-based PN advice is not so readily available. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence for genotype-based personalised information on motivating behaviour change, and factors which may affect the impact of genotype-based personalised advice. Recent findings in PN will also be discussed, with respect to a large European study, Food4Me, which investigated the impact of varying levels of PN advice on motivating behaviour change. The researchers reported that PN advice resulted in greater dietary changes compared with general healthy eating advice, but no additional benefit was observed for PN advice based on phenotype and genotype information. Within Food4Me, work from our group revealed that knowledge of MTHFR genotype did not significantly improve intakes of dietary folate. In general, evidence is weak with regard to genotype-based PN advice. For future work, studies should test the impact of PN advice developed on a strong nutrigenetic evidence base, ensure an appropriate study design for the research question asked, and incorporate behaviour change techniques into the intervention.

Preclinical Alzheimer's disease: Definition, natural history, and diagnostic criteria

During the past decade, a conceptual shift occurred in the field of Alzheimer's disease (AD) considering the disease as a continuum. Thanks to evolving biomarker research and substantial discoveries, it is now possible to identify the disease even at the preclinical stage before the occurrence of the first clinical symptoms. This preclinical stage of AD has become a major research focus as the field postulates that early intervention may offer the best chance of therapeutic success. To date, very little evidence is established on this "silent" stage of the disease. A clarification is needed about the definitions and lexicon, the limits, the natural history, the markers of progression, and the ethical consequence of detecting the disease at this asymptomatic stage. This article is aimed at addressing all the different issues by providing for each of them an updated review of the literature and evidence, with practical recommendations.

Personal Genomic Testing for Cancer Risk: Results From the Impact of Personal Genomics Study

Purpose Significant concerns exist regarding the potential for unwarranted behavior changes and the overuse of health care resources in response to direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing (PGT). However, little is known about customers' behaviors after PGT. Methods Longitudinal surveys were given to new customers of 23andMe (Mountain View, CA) and Pathway Genomics (San Diego, CA). Survey data were linked to individual-level PGT results through a secure data transfer process. Results Of the 1,042 customers who completed baseline and 6-month surveys (response rate, 71.2%), 762 had complete cancer-related data and were analyzed. Most customers reported that learning about their genetic risk of cancers was a motivation for testing (colorectal, 88%; prostate, 95%; breast, 94%). No customers tested positive for pathogenic mutations in highly penetrant cancer susceptibility genes. A minority of individuals received elevated single nucleotide polymorphism-based PGT cancer risk estimates (colorectal, 24%; prostate, 24%; breast, 12%). At 6 months, customers who received elevated PGT cancer risk estimates were not significantly more likely to change their diet, exercise, or advanced planning behaviors or engage in cancer screening, compared with individuals at average or reduced risk. Men who received elevated PGT prostate cancer risk estimates changed their vitamin and supplement use more than those at average or reduced risk (22% v 7.6%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.44 to 8.18). Predictors of 6-month behavior include baseline behavior (exercise, vitamin or supplement use, and screening), worse health status (diet and vitamin or supplement use), and older age (advanced planning, screening). Conclusion Most adults receiving elevated direct-to-consumer PGT single nucleotide polymorphism-based cancer risk estimates did not significantly change their diet, exercise, advanced care planning, or cancer screening behaviors.

Psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosing Alzheimer's disease biomarkers to research participants: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Current Alzheimer's disease (AD) research initiatives focus on cognitively healthy individuals with biomarkers that are associated with the development of AD. It is unclear whether biomarker results should be returned to research participants and what the psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosure are. This systematic review therefore examines the psychological, behavioral and social effects of disclosing genetic and nongenetic AD-related biomarkers to cognitively healthy research participants.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in eight scientific databases. Three independent reviewers screened the identified records and selected relevant articles. Results extracted from the included articles were aggregated and presented per effect group.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the data synthesis. None of the identified studies examined the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers. All studies but one concerned the disclosure of APOE genotype and were conducted in the USA. Study populations consisted largely of cognitively healthy first-degree relatives of AD patients. In this group, disclosure of an increased risk was not associated with anxiety, depression or changes in perceived risk in relation to family history. Disclosure of an increased risk did lead to an increase in specific test-related distress levels, health-related behavior changes and long-term care insurance uptake and possibly diminished memory functioning.

CONCLUSION

In cognitively healthy research participants with a first-degree relative with AD, disclosure of APOE ε4-positivity does not lead to elevated anxiety and depression levels, but does increase test-related distress and results in behavior changes concerning insurance and health. We did not find studies reporting the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers and only one study included people without a family history of AD. Empirical studies on the effects of disclosing nongenetic biomarkers and of disclosure to persons without a family history of AD are urgently needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO international prospective register for systematic reviews CRD42016035388 . Registered 19 February 2016.

The impact of MTHFR 677C → T risk knowledge on changes in folate intake: findings from the Food4Me study

BACKGROUND

It is hypothesised that individuals with knowledge of their genetic risk are more likely to make health-promoting dietary and lifestyle changes. The present study aims to test this hypothesis using data from the Food4Me study. This was a 6-month Internet-based randomised controlled trial conducted across seven centres in Europe where individuals received either general healthy eating advice or varying levels of personalised nutrition advice. Participants who received genotype-based personalised advice were informed whether they had the risk (CT/TT) (n = 178) or non-risk (CC) (n = 141) alleles of the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene in relation to cardiovascular health and the importance of a sufficient intake of folate. General linear model analysis was used to assess changes in folate intake between the MTHFR risk, MTHFR non-risk and control groups from baseline to month 6 of the intervention.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the groups for age, gender or BMI. However, there was a significant difference in country distribution between the groups (p = 0.010). Baseline folate intakes were 412 ± 172, 391 ± 190 and 410 ± 186 μg per 10 MJ for the risk, non-risk and control groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between the three groups in terms of changes in folate intakes from baseline to month 6. Similarly, there were no changes in reported intake of food groups high in folate.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that knowledge of MTHFR 677C → T genotype did not improve folate intake in participants with the risk variant compared with those with the non-risk variant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01530139.

Ethical challenges in preclinical Alzheimer's disease observational studies and trials: Results of the Barcelona summit

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is among the most significant health care burdens. Disappointing results from clinical trials in late-stage AD persons combined with hopeful results from trials in persons with early-stage suggest that research in the preclinical stage of AD is necessary to define an optimal therapeutic success window. We review the justification for conducting trials in the preclinical stage and highlight novel ethical challenges that arise and are related to determining appropriate risk-benefit ratios and disclosing individuals' biomarker status. We propose that to conduct clinical trials with these participants, we need to improve public understanding of AD using unified vocabulary, resolve the acceptable risk-benefit ratio in asymptomatic participants, and disclose or not biomarker status with attention to study type (observational studies vs clinical trials). Overcoming these challenges will justify clinical trials in preclinical AD at the societal level and aid to the development of societal and legal support for trial participants.

Disclosing Pleiotropic Effects During Genetic Risk Assessment for Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Increasing use of genetic testing raises questions about disclosing secondary findings, including pleiotropic information.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and behavioral effect of disclosing modest associations between apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype and coronary artery disease (CAD) risk during APOE-based genetic risk assessments for Alzheimer disease (AD).

DESIGN

Randomized, multicenter equivalence clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00462917).

SETTING

4 teaching hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

257 asymptomatic adults were enrolled, 69% of whom had 1 AD-affected first-degree relative.

INTERVENTION

Disclosure of genetic risk information about AD and CAD (AD+CAD) or AD only (AD-only).

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) scores at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were all measures at 6 weeks and 6 months and test-related distress and health behavior changes at 12 months.

RESULTS

At 12 months, mean BAI scores were 3.5 in both the AD-only and AD+CAD groups (difference, 0.0 [95% CI, -1.0 to 1.0]), and mean CES-D scores were 6.4 and 7.1 in the AD-only and AD+CAD groups, respectively (difference, 0.7 [CI, -1.0 to 2.4]). Both confidence bounds fell within the equivalence margin of ±5 points. Among carriers of the APOE ε4 allele, distress was lower in the AD+CAD groups (difference, -4.8 [CI, -8.6 to -1.0]) (P = 0.031 for the interaction between group and APOE genotype). Participants in the AD+CAD groups also reported more health behavior changes, regardless of APOE genotype.

LIMITATIONS

Outcomes were self-reported by volunteers without severe anxiety, severe depression, or cognitive problems. Analyses omitted 33 randomly assigned participants.

CONCLUSION

Disclosure of pleiotropic information did not increase anxiety or depression and may have decreased distress among persons at increased risk for 2 conditions. Providing risk modification information about CAD improved health behaviors. Findings highlight the potential benefits of disclosure of secondary genetic findings when options exist for decreasing risk.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Human Genome Research Institute.

The Alzheimer's Prevention Clinic at Weill Cornell Medical College / New York - Presbyterian Hospital: Risk Stratification and Personalized Early Intervention

In July 2013, Weill Cornell Medical College founded the first Alzheimer's Prevention Clinic (APC) in the United States, providing direct clinical care to family members of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) as part of the Weill Cornell Memory Disorders Program. At the APC, patients seeking to lower their AD risk undergo a comprehensive assessment, receive a personalized plan based on rapidly evolving scientific evidence, and are followed over time using validated as well as emerging clinical and research technologies. The APC approach applies the principles of pharmacogenomics, nutrigenomics and clinical precision medicine, to tailor individualized therapies for patients. Longitudinal measures currently assessed in the clinic include anthropometrics, cognition, blood biomarkers (i.e., lipid, inflammatory, metabolic, nutritional) and genetics, as well as validated, self-reported measures that enable patients to track several aspects of health-related quality of life. Patients are educated on the fundamental concepts of AD prevention via an interactive online course hosted on Alzheimer's Universe (www.AlzU.org), which also contains several activities including validated computer-based cognitive testing. The primary goal of the APC is to employ preventative measures that lower modifiable AD risk, possibly leading to a delay in onset of future symptoms. Our secondary goal is to establish a cohort of at-risk individuals who will be primed to participate in future AD prevention trials as disease-modifying agents emerge for testing at earlier stages of the AD process. The clinical services are intended to lower concern for future disease by giving patients a greater sense of control over their brain health.

Can metabotyping help deliver the promise of personalised nutrition?

Over a decade since the completion of the human genome sequence, the promise of personalised nutrition available to all has yet to become a reality. While the definition was originally very gene-focused, in recent years, a model of personalised nutrition has emerged with the incorporation of dietary, phenotypic and genotypic information at various levels. Developing on from the idea of personalised nutrition, the concept of targeted nutrition has evolved which refers to the delivery of tailored dietary advice at a group level rather than at an individual level. Central to this concept is metabotyping or metabolic phenotyping, which is the ability to group similar individuals together based on their metabolic or phenotypic profiles. Applications of the metabotyping concept extend from the nutrition to the medical literature. While there are many examples of the metabotype approach, there is a dearth in the literature with regard to the development of tailored interventions for groups of individuals. This review will first explore the effectiveness of personalised nutrition in motivating behaviour change and secondly, examine potential novel ways for the delivery of personalised advice at a population level through a metabotyping approach. Based on recent findings from our work, we will demonstrate a novel strategy for the delivery of tailored dietary advice at a group level using this concept. In general, there is a strong emerging evidence to support the effectiveness of personalised nutrition; future work should ascertain if targeted nutrition can motivate behaviour change in a similar manner.

Associations between self-referral and health behavior responses to genetic risk information

BACKGROUND

Studies examining whether genetic risk information about common, complex diseases can motivate individuals to improve health behaviors and advance planning have shown mixed results. Examining the influence of different study recruitment strategies may help reconcile inconsistencies.

METHODS

Secondary analyses were conducted on data from the REVEAL study, a series of randomized clinical trials examining the impact of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease (AD). We tested whether self-referred participants (SRPs) were more likely than actively recruited participants (ARPs) to report health behavior and advance planning changes after AD risk and APOE genotype disclosure.

RESULTS

Of 795 participants with known recruitment status, 546 (69%) were self-referred and 249 (31%) had been actively recruited. SRPs were younger, less likely to identify as African American, had higher household incomes, and were more attentive to AD than ARPs (all P < 0.01). They also dropped out of the study before genetic risk disclosure less frequently (26% versus 41%, P < 0.001). Cohorts did not differ in their likelihood of reporting a change to at least one health behavior 6 weeks and 12 months after genetic risk disclosure, nor in intentions to change at least one behavior in the future. However, interaction effects were observed where ε4-positive SRPs were more likely than ε4-negative SRPs to report changes specifically to mental activities (38% vs 19%, p < 0.001) and diets (21% vs 12%, p = 0.016) six weeks post-disclosure, whereas differences between ε4-positive and ε4-negative ARPs were not evident for mental activities (15% vs 21%, p = 0.413) or diets (8% versus 16%, P = 0.190). Similarly, ε4-positive participants were more likely than ε4-negative participants to report intentions to change long-term care insurance among SRPs (20% vs 5%, p < 0.001), but not ARPs (5% versus 9%, P = 0.365).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who proactively seek AD genetic risk assessment are more likely to undergo testing and use results to inform behavior changes than those who respond to genetic testing offers. These results demonstrate how the behavioral impact of genetic risk information may vary according to the models by which services are provided, and suggest that how participants are recruited into translational genomics research can influence findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00089882 and NCT00462917.

Public beliefs and knowledge about risk and protective factors for Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess public beliefs and knowledge about risk and protective factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

A brief survey module was added to the Health and Retirement Study, a longstanding national panel study of the U.S. population over the age of 50.

RESULTS

Respondents were 1641 adults (mean age=64.4 years, 53.6% female, 81.7% White). Most (60.1%) indicated interest in learning their AD risk, with 29.4% expressing active worry. Many failed to recognize that medications to prevent AD are not available (39.1%) or that having an affected first-degree relative is associated with increased disease risk (32%). Many respondents believed that various actions (e.g., mental activity, eating a healthy diet) would be effective in reducing AD risk.

CONCLUSION

Older and middle-aged adults are interested in their AD risk status and believe that steps can be taken to reduce disease risk. Tailored education efforts are needed to address potential misconceptions about risk and protective factors.

Implementation and utilization of genetic testing in personalized medicine

Clinical genetic testing began over 30 years ago with the availability of mutation detection for sickle cell disease diagnosis. Since then, the field has dramatically transformed to include gene sequencing, high-throughput targeted genotyping, prenatal mutation detection, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, population-based carrier screening, and now genome-wide analyses using microarrays and next-generation sequencing. Despite these significant advances in molecular technologies and testing capabilities, clinical genetics laboratories historically have been centered on mutation detection for Mendelian disorders. However, the ongoing identification of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequence variants associated with common diseases prompted the availability of testing for personal disease risk estimation, and created commercial opportunities for direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies that assay these variants. This germline genetic risk, in conjunction with other clinical, family, and demographic variables, are the key components of the personalized medicine paradigm, which aims to apply personal genomic and other relevant data into a patient’s clinical assessment to more precisely guide medical management. However, genetic testing for disease risk estimation is an ongoing topic of debate, largely due to inconsistencies in the results, concerns over clinical validity and utility, and the variable mode of delivery when returning genetic results to patients in the absence of traditional counseling. A related class of genetic testing with analogous issues of clinical utility and acceptance is pharmacogenetic testing, which interrogates sequence variants implicated in interindividual drug response variability. Although clinical pharmacogenetic testing has not previously been widely adopted, advances in rapid turnaround time genetic testing technology and the recent implementation of preemptive genotyping programs at selected medical centers suggest that personalized medicine through pharmacogenetics is now a reality. This review aims to summarize the current state of implementing genetic testing for personalized medicine, with an emphasis on clinical pharmacogenetic testing.

Summaries of oral sessions at the XXI World Congress of Psychiatric Genetics, Boston, Massachusetts, 17-21 October 2013: state of the field

The XXI World Congress of Psychiatric Genetics (WCPG), sponsored by the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics (ISPG), took place in Boston, Massachusetts, on 17-21 October 2013. Approximately 900 participants gathered to discuss the latest findings in this rapidly advancing field. The following report was written by student travel awardees. Each was assigned one or more sessions as a rapporteur. This manuscript represents topics covered in most, but not all of the oral presentations during the conference, and contains some of the major notable new findings reported.

Ethical issues in the use of genetic testing of patients with schizophrenia and their families

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review outlines the positive and negative aspects of DNA testing and provides an account of the issues particularly relevant to schizophrenia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Modern technology has changed the field of medicine so rapidly that patients and their families have become much more independent in their healthcare decisions than in the previous decade. Simply by finding information on the Internet, they gain knowledge about disease diagnosis, treatment options and their side-effects. No medical field likely has been more affected and more controversial than that of genetics. It is now possible to sequence the individual human genome and detect single nucleotide variations, microdeletions and duplications within it. Commercial companies have sprung up in a similar manner to the software or electronic industries and have begun to market direct-to-consumer DNA testing. Much of this may be performed to satisfy curiosity about one's ancestry; but commercially available results that appear incidentally can also be distributed to the consumer.

SUMMARY

Ethicists, genetics researchers, clinicians and government agencies are currently in discussion about concerns raised about commercially available DNA testing, while at the same time recognizing its value in some instances to be able to predict very serious disabilities.

Cancer risk assessment using genetic panel testing: considerations for clinical application

With the completion of the Human Genome Project and the development of high throughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, the use of multiplex genetic testing, in which multiple genes are sequenced simultaneously to test for one or more conditions, is growing rapidly. Reflecting underlying heterogeneity where a broad range of genes confer risks for one or more cancers, the development of genetic cancer panels to assess these risks represents just one example of how multiplex testing is being applied clinically. There are a number of issues and challenges to consider when conducting genetic testing for cancer risk assessment, and these issues become exceedingly more complex when moving from the traditional single-gene approach to panel testing. Here, we address the practical considerations for clinical use of panel testing for breast, ovarian, and colon cancers, including the benefits, limitations and challenges, genetic counseling issues, and management guidelines.

The promise of using personalized genomic information to promote behavior change: is the debate over, or just beginning?

Over recent years, significant debate has centered on whether and how communication of personalized genomic risk information can positively influence health behavior change. Several thoughtful commentaries have cautioned that efforts to incorporate genomic risk feedback to motivate health behavior change have had little success. As a field, we should consider the reasons for this limited success and be strategic in the next steps for this line of research. In this article, we consider several reasons that prior research that integrates personalized genomic information has had relative degrees of success in changing or maintaining health behaviors. We suggest ways forward and outline the possibilities presented by emerging technologies and novel approaches in translational genomic research.

Factors associated with maternal-reported actions to prevent type 1 diabetes in the first year of the TEDDY study

OBJECTIVE

Mothers of children at risk for type 1 diabetes report engaging in preventive behaviors. The purpose of this study is to further document these actions in an international, longitudinal sample and examine variables that predict whether mothers engage in these behaviors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study examined an international sample (from Finland, Germany, Sweden, and the U.S.) from the naturalistic, longitudinal The Environmental Determinants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study, which tracked children genetically at risk for type 1 diabetes from birth to age 15 years. Mothers of 7,613 infants aged 6 months and 6,503 infants aged 15 months completed questionnaires assessing psychosocial factors and actions intended to prevent diabetes.

RESULTS

Many mothers (29.9% at 6 months and 42.8% at 15 months) reported engaging in a behavior intended to prevent type 1 diabetes, with the largest percentages (20.9-29.2%) reporting making changes to their child's diet (e.g., reducing the consumption of sweets and carbohydrates). Factors related to engaging in preventive behaviors include older maternal age; higher maternal education; minority status; having only one child; having a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes; being from a country other than Sweden; having an accurate perception of the child's increased risk for developing diabetes; having postpartum depression, maternal anxiety, and worry about the risk of diabetes; and believing that diabetes can be prevented.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that many mothers engage in actions to prevent diabetes and highlight the importance of tracking these behaviors to ensure the validity of naturalistic observational studies.

Emerging issues in public health genomics

This review highlights emerging areas of interest in public health genomics. First, we describe recent advances in newborn screening (NBS), with a focus on the practice and policy implications of current and future efforts to expand NBS programs (e.g., via next-generation sequencing). Next, we detail research findings from the rapidly progressing field of epigenetics and epigenomics, highlighting ways in which our emerging understanding in these areas could guide future intervention and research efforts in public health. We close by considering various ethical, legal, and social issues posed by recent developments in public health genomics; these include policies to regulate access to personal genomic information, the need to enhance genetic literacy in both health professionals and the public, and challenges in ensuring that the benefits (and burdens) of genomic discoveries and applications are equitably distributed. We also note needs for future genomic research that integrates across basic and social sciences.

Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine

Communicating genetic risk information in ways that maximize understanding and promote health is increasingly important given the rapidly expanding availability and capabilities of genomic technologies. A well-developed literature on risk communication in general provides guidance for best practices, including presentation of information in multiple formats, attention to framing effects, use of graphics, sensitivity to the way numbers are presented, parsimony of information, attentiveness to emotions, and interactivity as part of the communication process. Challenges to communicating genetic risk information include deciding how best to tailor it, streamlining the process, deciding what information to disclose, accepting that communications may have limited influence, and understanding the impact of context. Meeting these challenges has great potential for empowering individuals to adopt healthier lifestyles and improve public health, but will require multidisciplinary approaches and collaboration.

How could disclosing incidental information from whole-genome sequencing affect patient behavior?

In this article, we argue that disclosure of incidental findings from whole-genome sequencing has the potential to motivate individuals to change health behaviors through psychological mechanisms that differ from typical risk assessment interventions. Their ability to do so, however, is likely to be highly contingent upon the nature of the incidental findings and how they are disclosed, the context of the disclosure and the characteristics of the patient. Moreover, clinicians need to be aware that behavioral responses may occur in unanticipated ways. This article argues for commentators and policy makers to take a cautious but optimistic perspective while empirical evidence is collected through ongoing research involving whole-genome sequencing and the disclosure of incidental information.

Stakeholder views on returning research results

While the disclosure of research findings is relevant to all types of biomedical research, it has garnered particular attention with respect to genetics and genomics research due to some of the unique aspects of the data and the high public profile of the field. In this chapter, we review the attitudes of stakeholders (research participants, policymakers, and researchers) to define areas of consensus regarding the issue of returning research results across and within groups. In addition to stakeholder attitudes about obligations and interest in research results, other major related issues related to returning research results, such as informed consent, communication of research results, and cost, are discussed. Given the consensus between stakeholders to return summary reports of a study's outcomes and individual research results of clinical significance, we conclude that the time has come to encourage, if not require, researchers to consider these issues in the developmental planning stages of a project and to plan and budget accordingly.

Risk disclosure and preclinical Alzheimer's disease clinical trial enrollment

To identify the facilitators and barriers to preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trial recruitment, 50 cognitively normal participants were interviewed after being randomized to one of two hypothetical AD risk scenarios: (1) the general age-related risk for AD, or (2) being at 50% increased risk for AD. Participants provided uncued barriers and facilitators to the hypothetical decision of whether they would enroll. Thirteen themes of facilitators and five themes of barriers were identified. The most common barrier was fear related to taking study drug. Those randomized to being at increased risk for AD more frequently cited lowering personal risk as a facilitator (P = .01) and less frequently cited time as a barrier to enrollment (P = .02). These results suggest potential challenges to preclinical AD clinical trial recruitment and that disclosing risk information may enhance enrollment.

Impact of genetic risk assessment on nutrition-related lifestyle behaviours

Genetic susceptibility testing for common complex disease is a practice that is currently in clinical use. There are two types of gene mutations, and therefore, two varieties of genotype testing: deterministic and susceptibility. As the term suggests, deterministic genes determine whether or not a person will develop a given trait in mendelian fashion, such as Huntington's disease. Genotype screening for such deterministic mutations has existed for decades, and is commonly used in routine medical practice. In recent years, the sequencing of the human genome has identified several 'susceptibility genes' or genes with incomplete penetrance. Mutations in these genes may increase disease susceptibility, but are not causative for disease. Genetic susceptibility testing allows unaffected individuals to obtain risk information for a variety of common complex diseases and health conditions including Alzheimer's disease (AD), CVD, cancer and diabetes. The availability of genetic susceptibility testing has increased over the past decade, and several studies are now focusing on the impact that genetic testing has on health and other lifestyle behaviours related to nutrition. The aim of this paper is to review the literature and evaluate what, if any, impact genetic risk assessment has on behaviours related to nutrition and physical activity. This paper summarises seven clinical studies that evaluated the impact of disclosing genetic risk information for disease on nutrition-related health behaviour changes. Of these seven studies, only three studies reported that health behaviour change was influenced by genotype disclosure.

A randomized trial of genetic information for personalized nutrition

Personal genetic information has become increasingly accessible to the public as a result of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests; however, concerns have been raised over their value and potential risks. We compared the effects of providing genotype-based dietary advice with general recommendations on behavioral outcomes using a randomized controlled study. Participants were men and women from the Toronto Nutrigenomics and Health Study between the ages of 20-35 years (n = 149) who completed a survey to assess their awareness of DTC genetic tests and nutrigenomics, as well as potential motivations for undergoing genetic testing. Participants were then randomized into an intervention (I) or control (C) group and were given either genotype-based personalized dietary advice or general dietary advice, respectively. A second survey was administered to assess the participants' opinions of the dietary reports they received. A greater proportion of participants in the intervention group agreed that they understood the dietary advice they were given (93% (I) vs. 78% (C); p = 0.009). Participants in the intervention group were more likely to agree that the dietary recommendations they received would be useful when considering their diet (88% (I) vs. 72% (C); p = 0.02) and wanted to know more about the recommendations (95% (I) vs. 76% (C); p < 0.0001). Only 9% of participants in the intervention group reported feeling uneasy about learning their genetic information. These findings suggest that individuals find dietary recommendations based on genetics more understandable and more useful than general dietary advice. Very few feel uneasy about receiving their genetic information that relates to personalized nutrition.

Use of vitamin and mineral supplements in long-term care home residents

Vitamin–mineral supplementation may offer older adults health and cognition-related benefits but overuse may contribute to polypharmacy. We examined the prevalence of supplement usage in long-term care facility (LTC) residents (≥65 years of age). As cognition may be affected by nutrition, we also examined use in those with diagnosis of dementia and those with no dementia diagnosis. The prevalence of supplement usage and overall “pill count” from pharmaceutical use was assessed in 189 LTC residents and a subsample of 56 older adults with dementia diagnosis, respectively. Participants were residing in an LTC facility of a mid-size metropolitan area during 2009. The average use of supplements was 1.0 per day for all residents, with 35% taking vitamin D supplements, 20% multivitamins, and 26% calcium. Supplement use was similar (p ≥ 0.05) for those with dementia diagnosis (53%, average 2.0 per day) and for those without such diagnosis (45%, average 2.2 per day). Usage ranged between 1–6 supplements per day. In both of these groups, ∼73% of users were taking vitamin D. The number of prescribed medications ranged from 4 to 24 (average 10.2) in a subsample of residents whose supplement intake was 0 to 6 (average 2). These findings suggest an overall low rate of supplement use, with no significant differences (p ≥ 0.05) in use between residents with and without dementia diagnosis. However, some residents were at risk for supplement overuse.

Changes to perceptions of the pros and cons of genetic susceptibility testing after APOE genotyping for Alzheimer disease risk

PURPOSE

Perceptions about the pros and cons of genetic susceptibility testing are among the best predictors of test utilization. How actual testing changes such perceptions has yet to be examined.

METHODS

In a clinical trial, first-degree relatives of patients with Alzheimer disease received genetic risk assessments for Alzheimer disease including APOE disclosure. Participants rated 11 possible benefits associated with genetic testing (pros) and 10 risks or limitations (cons) before genetic risk disclosure and again 12 months afterward.

RESULTS

Pros were rated higher than cons at baseline (3.53 vs. 1.83, P < 0.001) and at 12 months after risk disclosure (3.33 vs. 1.88, P < 0.001). Ratings of pros decreased during the 12-month period (3.33 vs. 3.53, P < 0.001). Ratings of cons did not change (1.88 vs. 1.83, P = 0.199) except for a three-item discrimination subscale which increased (2.07 vs. 1.92, P = 0.012). Among specific pros and cons, three items related to prevention and treatment changed the most.

CONCLUSION

The process of APOE genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer disease sensitizes some to its limitations and the risks of discrimination; however, 1-year after disclosure, test recipients still consider the pros to strongly outweigh the cons.

Direct-to-consumer personalized genomic testing

Over the past 18 months, there have been notable developments in the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genomic testing arena, in particular with regard to issues surrounding governmental regulation in the USA. While commentaries continue to proliferate on this topic, actual empirical research remains relatively scant. In terms of DTC genomic testing for disease susceptibility, most of the research has centered on uptake, perceptions and attitudes toward testing among health care professionals and consumers. Only a few available studies have examined actual behavioral response among consumers, and we are not aware of any studies that have examined response to DTC genetic testing for ancestry or for drug response. We propose that further research in this area is desperately needed, despite challenges in designing appropriate studies given the rapid pace at which the field is evolving. Ultimately, DTC genomic testing for common markers and conditions is only a precursor to the eventual cost-effectiveness and wide availability of whole genome sequencing of individuals, although it remains unclear whether DTC genomic information will still be attainable. Either way, however, current knowledge needs to be extended and enhanced with respect to the delivery, impact and use of increasingly accurate and comprehensive individualized genomic data.

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?

What Psychiatrists Should Know about Genes and Alzheimer's Disease

Alzheimer's disease is a devastating illness, and patients may be exceptionally concerned that they have genes that contribute to this illness, especially if there is a family history of Alzheimer's disease. This article reviews core findings regarding the genes that contribute to the early-onset (familial) and late-onset forms of Alzheimer's disease and related findings regarding the needs of psychiatrists when discussing the disease with patients. Previously, clinicians believed that patients who tested positive for the APOE gene linked to late-onset Alzheimer's disease would be harmed by this knowledge to a greater extent than those who did not know they had the gene. Thus, clinicians were strongly recommending to patients that they not have this testing. This article includes the practice-changing relevance of a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which reported that a group of patients tested for the APOE gene who found out that they were positive for this gene were not significantly harmed by having acquired this knowledge.

Consumers' views of direct-to-consumer genetic information

In this report, we describe the evolution and types of genetic information provided directly to consumers, discuss potential advantages and disadvantages of these products, and review research evaluating consumer responses to direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. The available evidence to date has focused on predictive tests and does not suggest that individuals, health care providers, or health care systems have been harmed by a DTC provision of genetic information. An understanding of consumer responses to susceptibility tests has lagged behind. The Multiplex Initiative is presented as a case study of research to understand consumers' responses to DTC susceptibility tests. Three priority areas are recommended for accelerated research activities to inform public policy regarding DTC genetic information: (a) exploring consumer's long-term responses to DTC genetic testing on a comprehensive set of outcomes, (b) evaluating optimal services to support decision making about genetic testing, and (c) evaluating best practices in promoting genetic competencies among health providers.