Evaluating online direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests: informed choices or buyers beware?

Direct-to-consumer tests advertised online in Australia and their implications for medical overuse: systematic online review and a typology of clinical utility

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to map the range and variety of direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests advertised online in Australia and analyse their potential clinical utility and implications for medical overuse.

DESIGN

Systematic online search of DTC test products in Google and Google Shopping. DTC test advertisements data were collected and analysed to develop a typology of potential clinical utility of the tests at population level, assessing their potential benefits and harms using available evidence, informed by concepts of medical overuse.

RESULTS

We identified 484 DTC tests (103 unique products), ranging from $A12.99 to $A1947 in cost (mean $A197.83; median $A148.50). Using our typology, we assigned the tests into one of four categories: tests with potential clinical utility (10.7%); tests with limited clinical utility (30.6%); non-evidence-based commercial 'health checks' (41.9%); and tests whose methods and/or target conditions are not recognised by the general medical community (16.7%). Of the products identified, 56% did not state that they offered pretest or post-test consultation, and 51% did not report analytical performance of the test or laboratory accreditation.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-Australia study shows most DTC tests sold online have low potential clinical utility, with healthy consumers constituting the main target market. Harms may be caused by overdiagnosis, high rates of false positives and treatment decisions led by non-evidence-based tests, as well as financial costs of unnecessary and inappropriate testing. Regulatory mechanisms should demand a higher standard of evidence of clinical utility and efficacy for DTC tests. Better transparency and reporting of health outcomes, and the development of decision-support resources for consumers are needed.

The Commercialization of Genetic Research: A Pilot Study

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

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

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

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

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

Promotion and marketing of bioidentical hormone therapy on the internet: a content analysis of websites

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of information presented and claims made on websites offering bioidentical hormone therapy (BHT) products or services.

METHODS

A quantitative content analysis was completed on 100 websites promoting or offering BHT products or services. Websites were identified through Google search engine from September to October 2013. Search terms included "bioidentical hormone therapy" or "bioidentical progesterone," accompanied by "purchase or buy," "service," or "doctors." The Brief DISCERN instrument was used to determine the quality of the health information.

RESULTS

Websites were from Canada (59%), United States (38%), and other countries (3%). Almost half of the websites originated from medical clinics (47%), and healthcare professionals offering BHT services included physicians (50%), pharmacists (19%), and naturopaths (16%). Majority of websites promoted BHT as custom-compounded formulations (62%), with only 27% indicating that BHT is also commercially available. Websites overall claimed that BHT had less risk compared with conventional hormone therapy (62%). BHT was described as having less breast cancer risk (40%), whereas over a quarter of websites described BHT as "protective" for breast cancer. Websites mainly targeted women (99%), with males mentioned in 62% of websites. Product descriptors used to promote BHT included individualization (77%), natural (70%), hormone imbalance (56%), and antiaging (50%). The mean Brief DISCERN score was 15, indicating lower quality of information.

CONCLUSIONS

Claims made about BHT on the internet are misleading and not consistent with current professional organizations' recommendations. Understanding how BHT may be promoted on the internet can help healthcare professionals when educating patients.

One Step Forward, One Step Back: Changes in News Coverage of Medical Interventions

During 2005-2013, the award-winning website HealthNewsReview.org offered reviews of major media outlets' news stories related to health interventions, including tests, treatments, dietary changes, and prescription drugs. The reviews offered a measure by which the public and journalists themselves could assess the completeness and usefulness of health coverage across 10 criteria for quality reporting. This study produced an analysis of those reviews from 2005 to 2013, indicating significant changes in key areas. Analysis of 1,889 health news story reviews published by HealthNewsReview.org (HNR) between 2005 and 2013 showed that, on average, the stories reviewed during 2005-2010 successfully met just less than half of the criteria, but by 2010-2013, that average had improved to almost 70%. There were significant improvements over time in news organizations' success in meeting six of HNR's 10 criteria for a successful health news story related to drugs, devices, surgery and other medical procedures, and diet; however, when data for television stories were excluded, only the improvement in avoiding disease-mongering remained significant. In addition, there was a statistically significant decline in the percentage of stories rated satisfactory on establishing the true novelty of the intervention discussed in the story. There was no improvement in quantification of possible harms from medical interventions. Changes over time in meeting the criteria were related to outlet type and story topic.

Implementing an Internet-Delivered Skin Cancer Genetic Testing Intervention to Improve Sun Protection Behavior in a Diverse Population: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Limited translational genomic research currently exists to guide the availability, comprehension, and appropriate use of personalized genomics in diverse general population subgroups. Melanoma skin cancers are preventable, curable, common in the general population, and disproportionately increasing in Hispanics.

Objective

Variants in the melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene are present in approximately 50% of the population, are major factors in determining sun sensitivity, and confer a 2-to-3-fold increase in melanoma risk in the general population, even in populations with darker skin. Therefore, feedback regarding MC1R risk status may raise risk awareness and protective behavior in the general population.

Methods

We are conducting a randomized controlled trial examining Internet presentation of the risks and benefits of personalized genomic testing for MC1R gene variants that are associated with increased melanoma risk. We will enroll a total of 885 participants (462 participants are currently enrolled), who will be randomized 6:1 to personalized genomic testing for melanoma risk versus waiting list control. Control participants will be offered testing after outcome assessments. Participants will be balanced across self-reported Hispanic versus non-Hispanic ethnicity (n=750 in personalized genomic testing for melanoma risk arm; n=135 in control arm), and will be recruited from a general population cohort in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which is subject to year-round sun exposure. Baseline surveys will be completed in-person with study staff and follow-up measures will be completed via telephone.

Results

Aim 1 of the trial will examine the personal utility of personalized genomic testing for melanoma risk in terms of short-term (3-month) sun protection and skin screening behaviors, family and physician communication, and melanoma threat and control beliefs (ie, putative mediators of behavior change). We will also examine potential unintended consequences of testing among those who receive average-risk personalized genomic testing for melanoma risk findings, and examine predictors of sun protection at 3 months as the outcome. These findings will be used to develop messages for groups that receive average-risk feedback. Aim 2 will compare rates of test consideration in Hispanics versus non-Hispanics, including consideration of testing pros and cons and registration of a decision to either accept or decline testing. Aim 3 will examine personalized genomic testing for melanoma risk feedback comprehension, recall, satisfaction, and cancer-related distress in those who undergo testing, and whether these outcomes differ by ethnicity (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic), or sociocultural or demographic factors. Final outcome data collection is anticipated to be complete by October 2017, at which point data analysis will commence.

Conclusions

This study has important implications for personalized genomics in the context of melanoma risk, and may be broadly applicable as a model for delivery of personalized genomic feedback for other health conditions.

If you build it, they will come: unintended future uses of organised health data collections

BACKGROUND

Health research increasingly relies on organized collections of health data and biological samples. There are many types of sample and data collections that are used for health research, though these are collected for many purposes, not all of which are health-related. These collections exist under different jurisdictional and regulatory arrangements and include: 1) Population biobanks, cohort studies, and genome databases 2) Clinical and public health data 3) Direct-to-consumer genetic testing 4) Social media 5) Fitness trackers, health apps, and biometric data sensors Ethical, legal, and social challenges of such collections are well recognized, but there has been limited attention to the broader societal implications of the existence of these collections.

DISCUSSION

Although health research conducted using these collections is broadly recognized as beneficent, secondary uses of these data and samples may be controversial. We examine both documented and hypothetical scenarios of secondary uses of health data and samples. In particular, we focus on the use of health data for purposes of: Forensic investigations Civil lawsuits Identification of victims of mass casualty events Denial of entry for border security and immigration Making health resource rationing decisions Facilitating human rights abuses in autocratic regimes

CONCLUSIONS

Current safeguards relating to the use of health data and samples include research ethics oversight and privacy laws. These safeguards have a strong focus on informed consent and anonymization, which are aimed at the protection of the individual research subject. They are not intended to address broader societal implications of health data and sample collections. As such, existing arrangements are insufficient to protect against subversion of health databases for non-sanctioned secondary uses, or to provide guidance for reasonable but controversial secondary uses. We are concerned that existing debate in the scholarly literature and beyond has not sufficiently recognized the secondary data uses we outline in this paper. Our main purpose, therefore, is to raise awareness of the potential for unforeseen and unintended consequences, in particular negative consequences, of the increased availability and development of health data collections for research, by providing a comprehensive review of documented and hypothetical non-health research uses of such data.

Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review

Background

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GT) are easily purchased through the Internet, independent of a physician referral or approval for testing, allowing the retrieval of genetic information outside the clinical context. There is a broad debate about the testing validity, their impact on individuals, and what people know and perceive about them.

Objective

The aim of this review was to collect evidence on DTC-GT from a comprehensive perspective that unravels the complexity of the phenomenon.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out through PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Embase, in addition to Google Scholar according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist with the key term “Direct-to-consumer genetic test.”

Results

In the final sample, 118 articles were identified. Articles were summarized in five categories according to their focus on (1) knowledge of, attitude toward use of, and perception of DTC-GT (n=37), (2) the impact of genetic risk information on users (n=37), (3) the opinion of health professionals (n=20), (4) the content of websites selling DTC-GT (n=16), and (5) the scientific evidence and clinical utility of the tests (n=14). Most of the articles analyzed the attitude, knowledge, and perception of DTC-GT, highlighting an interest in using DTC-GT, along with the need for a health care professional to help interpret the results. The articles investigating the content analysis of the websites selling these tests are in agreement that the information provided by the companies about genetic testing is not completely comprehensive for the consumer. Given that risk information can modify consumers’ health behavior, there are surprisingly few studies carried out on actual consumers and they do not confirm the overall concerns on the possible impact of DTC-GT. Data from studies that investigate the quality of the tests offered confirm that they are not informative, have little predictive power, and do not measure genetic risk appropriately.

Conclusions

The impact of DTC-GT on consumers’ health perceptions and behaviors is an emerging concern. However, negative effects on consumers or health benefits have yet to be observed. Nevertheless, since the online market of DTC-GT is expected to grow, it is important to remain aware of a possible impact.

Personal utility in genomic testing: is there such a thing?

In ethical and regulatory discussions on new applications of genomic testing technologies, the notion of 'personal utility' has been mentioned repeatedly. It has been used to justify direct access to commercially offered genomic testing or feedback of individual research results to research or biobank participants. Sometimes research participants or consumers claim a right to genomic information with an appeal to personal utility. As of yet, no systematic account of the umbrella notion of personal utility has been given. This paper offers a definition of personal utility that places it in the middle of the spectrum between clinical utility and personal perceptions of utility, and that acknowledges its normative charge. The paper discusses two perspectives on personal utility, the healthcare perspective and the consumer perspective, and argues that these are too narrow and too wide, respectively. Instead, it proposes a normative definition of personal utility that postulates information and potential use as necessary conditions of utility. This definition entails that perceived utility does not equal personal utility, and that expert judgment may be necessary to help determine whether a genomic test can have personal utility for someone. Two examples of genomic tests are presented to illustrate the discrepancies between perceived utility and our proposed definition of personal utility. The paper concludes that while there is room for the notion of personal utility in the ethical evaluation and regulation of genomic tests, the justificatory role of personal utility is not unlimited. For in the absence of clinical validity and reasonable potential use of information, there is no personal utility.

Development of a communication protocol for telephone disclosure of genetic test results for cancer predisposition

Background

Dissemination of genetic testing for disease susceptibility, one application of “personalized medicine”, holds the potential to empower patients and providers through informed risk reduction and prevention recommendations. Genetic testing has become a standard practice in cancer prevention for high-risk populations. Heightened consumer awareness of “cancer genes” and genes for other diseases (eg, cardiovascular and Alzheimer’s disease), as well as the burgeoning availability of increasingly complex genomic tests (ie, multi-gene, whole-exome and -genome sequencing), has escalated interest in and demand for genetic risk assessment and the specialists who provide it. Increasing demand is expected to surpass access to genetic specialists. Thus, there is urgent need to develop effective and efficient models of delivery of genetic information that comparably balance the risks and benefits to the current standard of in-person communication.

Objective

The aim of this pilot study was to develop and evaluate a theoretically grounded and rigorously developed protocol for telephone communication of BRCA1/2 (breast cancer) test results that might be generalizable to genetic testing for other hereditary cancer and noncancer syndromes.

Methods

Stakeholder data, health communication literature, and our theoretical model grounded in Self-Regulation Theory of Health Behavior were used to develop a telephone communication protocol for the communication of BRCA1/2 genetic test results. Framework analysis of selected audiotapes of disclosure sessions and stakeholders’ feedback were utilized to evaluate the efficacy and inform refinements to this protocol.

Results

Stakeholder feedback (n=86) and audiotapes (38%, 33/86) of telephone disclosures revealed perceived disadvantages and challenges including environmental factors (eg, non-private environment), patient-related factors (eg, low health literacy), testing-related factors (eg, additional testing needed), and communication factors (eg, no visual cues). Resulting modifications to the communication protocol for BRCA1/2 test results included clarified patient instructions, scheduled appointments, refined visual aids, expanded disclosure checklist items, and enhanced provider training.

Conclusions

Analyses of stakeholders’ experiences and audiotapes of telephone disclosure of BRCA1/2 test results informed revisions to communication strategies and a protocol to enhance patient outcomes when utilizing telephone to disclose genetic test results.

A consumer adoption model for personalized medicine: an exploratory study

Purpose

– The purpose of this research is to identify factors linked to the potential acceptance of personalized medicine (PM) by consumers. Roger’s diffusion of innovation model (1995) and the work of Duguay et al. (2003) on transgenic biopharmaceuticals contributed to the development of the proposed conceptual model.

Design/methodology/approach

– The study design was an exploratory cross-sectional survey that used a Canadian national online panel of 307 respondents.

Findings

– The results suggest that the most important factors leading to consumer adoption of PM are knowledge, relative advantage and compatibility with existing values. The level of homophilus traits was negatively related to the acceptance of PM.

Originality/value

– Marketers will need to provide documented evidence of PM’s benefits over existing therapy based on improved efficacy and reduced side effects. Further, concerns about higher price, product distribution and drug reimbursement policies may limit its acceptance. This is the first study to examine the potential adoption and acceptance of PM by consumers.

Awareness of cancer susceptibility genetic testing: the 2000, 2005, and 2010 National Health Interview Surveys

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing for several cancer susceptibility syndromes is clinically available; however, existing data suggest limited population awareness of such tests.

PURPOSE

To examine awareness regarding cancer genetic testing in the U.S. population aged ≥25 years in the 2000, 2005, and 2010 National Health Interview Surveys.

METHODS

The weighted percentages of respondents aware of cancer genetic tests, and percent changes from 2000-2005 and 2005-2010, overall and by demographic, family history, and healthcare factors were calculated. Interactions were used to evaluate the patterns of change in awareness between 2005 and 2010 among subgroups within each factor. To evaluate associations with awareness in 2005 and 2010, percentages were adjusted for covariates using multiple logistic regression. The analysis was performed in 2012.

RESULTS

Awareness decreased from 44.4% to 41.5% (p<0.001) between 2000 and 2005, and increased to 47.0% (p<0.001) in 2010. Awareness increased between 2005 and 2010 in most subgroups, particularly among individuals in the South (pinteraction=0.03) or with a usual place of care (pinteraction=0.01). In 2005 and 2010, awareness was positively associated with personal or family cancer history and high perceived cancer risk, and inversely associated with racial/ethnic minorities, age 25-39 or ≥60 years, male gender, lower education and income levels, public or no health insurance, and no provider contact in 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite improvement from 2005 to 2010, ≤50% of the U.S. adult population was aware of cancer genetic testing in 2010. Notably, disparities persist for racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with limited health care access or income.

Progress toward personalized medicine for glaucoma

How will you respond when a patient asks, "Doctor, what can I do to prevent myself from going blind from glaucoma like mom?". There is optimism that genetic profiling will help target patients to individualized treatments based on validated disease risk alleles, validated pharmacogenetic markers and behavioral modification. Personalized medicine will become a reality through identification of disease and pharmacogenetic markers, followed by careful study of how to employ this information in order to improve treatment outcomes. With advances in genomic technologies, research has shifted from the simple monogenic disease model to a complex multigenic and environmental disease model to answer these questions. Our challenges lie in developing risk models that incorporate gene-gene interactions, gene copy-number variations, environmental interactions, treatment effects and clinical covariates.

Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Patient trust in personal medical information is critical to increasing adherence to physician recommendations and medications. One of the anticipated benefits of learning of one's genomic risk for common diseases is the increased adoption of screening, preventive care and lifestyle changes. However, the equivocal results thus far reported of the positive impact of knowledge of genomic risk on behavior change may be due to lack of patients' trust in the results. As part of a clinical study to compare two methods of communication of genomic risk results for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we assessed patients' trust and preferred methods of delivery of genomic risk information. A total of 300 participants recruited from the general public in Durham, NC were randomized to receive their genomic risk for T2DM in-person from a genetic counselor or online through the testing company's web-site. Participants completed a baseline survey and three follow-up surveys after receiving results. Overall, participants reported high levels of trust in the test results. Participants who received their results in-person from the genetic counselor were significantly more likely to trust their results than those who reviewed their results on-line (p = 0.005). There was not a statistically significant difference in levels of trust among participants with increased genetic risk, as compared to other those with decreased or same as population risk (p = 0.1154). In the event they undergo genomic risk testing again, 55 % of participants overall indicated they would prefer to receive their results online compared to 28 % that would prefer to receive future results in-person. Of those participants preferring to receive results online, 77 % indicated they would prefer to have the option to speak to someone if they had questions with the online results (compared to accessing results online without the option of professional consultation). This is the first study to assess satisfaction with genomic risk testing by the method of delivery of the test result. The higher rate of trust in results delivered in-person suggests that online access reports may not result in serious consideration of results and lack of adoption of recommended preventive recommendations.

Attitudes towards Social Networking and Sharing Behaviors among Consumers of Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomics

Little is known about how consumers of direct-to-consumer personal genetic services share personal genetic risk information. In an age of ubiquitous online networking and rapid development of social networking tools, understanding how consumers share personal genetic risk assessments is critical in the development of appropriate and effective policies. This exploratory study investigates how consumers share personal genetic information and attitudes towards social networking behaviors.

METHODS

Adult participants aged 23 to 72 years old who purchased direct-to-consumer genetic testing from a personal genomics company were administered a web-based survey regarding their sharing activities and social networking behaviors related to their personal genetic test results.

RESULTS

80 participants completed the survey; of those, 45% shared results on Facebook and 50.9% reported meeting or reconnecting with more than 10 other individuals through the sharing of their personal genetic information. For help interpreting test results, 70.4% turned to Internet websites and online sources, compared to 22.7% who consulted their healthcare providers. Amongst participants, 51.8% reported that they believe the privacy of their personal genetic information would be breached in the future.

CONCLUSION

Consumers actively utilize online social networking tools to help them share and interpret their personal genetic information. These findings suggest a need for careful consideration of policy recommendations in light of the current ambiguity of regulation and oversight of consumer initiated sharing activities.

State of play in direct-to-consumer genetic testing for lifestyle-related diseases: market, marketing content, user experiences and regulation

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests have aroused controversy. Critics have argued many of the tests are not backed by scientific evidence, misguide their customers and should be regulated more stringently. Proponents suggest that finding out genetic susceptibilities for diseases could encourage healthier behaviours and makes the results of genetics research available to the public. This paper reviews the state of play in DTC genetic testing, focusing on tests identifying susceptibilities for lifestyle-related diseases. It will start with mapping the market for the tests. The paper will review (1) research on the content of the online marketing of DTC tests, (2) studies on the effects of DTC genetic tests on customers and (3) academic and policy proposals on how to regulate the tests. Current studies suggest that the marketing of DTC genetic tests often exaggerates their predictive powers, which could misguide consumers. However, research indicates that the tests do not seem to have major negative effects (worry and confusion) but neither do they engender positive effects (lifestyle change) on current users. Research on regulation of the tests has most commonly suggested regulating the marketing claims of the companies. In conclusion, the risks and benefits of DTC genetic tests are less significant than what has been predicted by critics and proponents, which will be argued reflects broader historical trends transforming health and medicine.

Genetic counseling and the ethical issues around direct to consumer genetic testing

Over the last several years, direct to consumer(DTC) genetic testing has received increasing attention in the public, healthcare and academic realms. DTC genetic testing companies face considerable criticism and scepticism,particularly from the medical and genetic counseling community. This raises the question of what specific aspects of DTC genetic testing provoke concerns, and conversely,promises, for genetic counselors. This paper addresses this question by exploring DTC genetic testing through an ethic allens. By considering the fundamental ethical approaches influencing genetic counseling (the ethic of care and principle-based ethics) we highlight the specific ethical concerns raised by DTC genetic testing companies. Ultimately,when considering the ethics of DTC testing in a genetic counseling context, we should think of it as a balancing act. We need careful and detailed consideration of the risks and troubling aspects of such testing, as well as the potentially beneficial direct and indirect impacts of the increased availability of DTC genetic testing. As a result it is essential that genetic counselors stay informed and involved in the ongoing debate about DTC genetic testing and DTC companies. Doing so will ensure that the ethical theories and principles fundamental to the profession of genetic counseling are promoted not just in traditional counseling sessions,but also on a broader level. Ultimately this will help ensure that the public enjoys the benefits of an increasingly genetic based healthcare system.

Interpretation of melanoma risk feedback in first-degree relatives of melanoma patients

Little is known about how individuals might interpret brief genetic risk feedback. We examined interpretation and behavioral intentions (sun protection, skin screening) in melanoma first-degree relatives (FDRs) after exposure to brief prototypic melanoma risk feedback. Using a 3 by 2 experimental pre-post design where feedback type (high-risk mutation, gene environment, and nongenetic) and risk level (positive versus negative findings) were systematically varied, 139 melanoma FDRs were randomized to receive one of the six scenarios. All scenarios included an explicit reminder that melanoma family history increased their risk regardless of their feedback. The findings indicate main effects by risk level but not feedback type; positive findings led to heightened anticipated melanoma risk perceptions and anticipated behavioral intentions. Yet those who received negative findings often discounted their family melanoma history. As such, 25%, 30%, and 32% of those who received negative mutation, gene-environment, and nongenetic feedback, respectively, reported that their risk was similar to the general population. Given the frequency with which those who pursue genetic testing may receive negative feedback, attention is needed to identify ideal strategies to present negative genetic findings in contexts such as direct to consumer channels where extensive genetic counseling is not required.

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

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

Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing has generated speculation about how customers will interpret results and how these interpretations will influence healthcare use and behavior; however, few empirical data on these topics exist. We conducted an online survey of DTC customers of 23andMe, deCODEme, and Navigenics to begin to address these questions. Random samples of U.S. DTC customers were invited to participate. Survey topics included demographics, perceptions of two sample DTC results, and health behaviors following DTC testing. Of 3,167 DTC customers invited, 33% (n = 1,048) completed the survey. Forty-three percent of respondents had sought additional information about a health condition tested; 28% had discussed their results with a healthcare professional; and 9% had followed up with additional lab tests. Sixteen percent of respondents had changed a medication or supplement regimen, and one-third said they were being more careful about their diet. Many of these health-related behaviors were significantly associated with responses to a question that asked how participants would perceive their colon cancer risk (as low, moderate, or high) if they received a test result showing an 11% lifetime risk, as compared to 5% risk in the general population. Respondents who would consider themselves to be at high risk for colon cancer were significantly more likely to have sought information about a disease (p = 0.03), discussed results with a physician (p = 0.05), changed their diet (p = 0.02), and started exercising more (p = 0.01). Participants' personal health contexts--including personal and family history of disease and quality of self-perceived health--were also associated with health-related behaviors after testing. Subjective interpretations of genetic risk data and personal context appear to be related to health behaviors among DTC customers. Sharing DTC test results with healthcare professionals may add perceived utility to the tests.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing

Genetics has fascinated societies since ancient times, and references to traits or behaviors that appear to be shared or different among related individuals have permeated legends, literature, and popular culture. Biomedical advances from the past century, and particularly the discovery of the DNA double helix, the increasing numbers of links that were established between mutations and medical conditions or phenotypes, and technological advances that facilitated the sequencing of the human genome, catalyzed the development of genetic testing. Genetic tests were initially performed in health care facilities, interpreted by health care providers, and included the availability of counseling. Recent years have seen an increased availability of genetic tests that are offered by companies directly to consumers, a phenomenon that became known as direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Tests offered in this setting range from the ones that are also provided in health care establishments to tests known as ‘recreational genomics,’ and consumers directly receive the test results. In addition, testing in this context often does not involve the availability of counseling and, when this is provided, it frequently occurs on-line or over the phone. As a field situated at the interface between biotechnology, biomedical research, and social sciences, direct-to-consumer genetic testing opens multiple challenges that can be appropriately addressed only by developing a complex, inter-disciplinary framework.

Health care providers and direct-to-consumer access and advertising of genetic testing in the United States

Marketing pressures, regulatory policies, clinical guidelines, and consumer demand all affect health care providers' knowledge and use of health-related genetic tests that are sold and/or advertised to consumers. In addition, clinical guidelines, regulatory policies, and educational efforts are needed to promote the informed use of genetic tests that are sold and advertised to consumers and health care providers. A shift in culture regarding the regulation of genetic tests that are sold directly to consumers is suggested: by recent actions taken by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including letters sent to direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies stating that their tests meet the definition of medical devices; by public meetings held by the FDA to discuss laboratory developed tests; and by the convening of the Molecular and Clinical Genetics Panel to gather input on scientific issues concerning DTC genetic tests that make medical claims. This review provides a brief overview of DTC advertising and the regulation of pharmaceuticals and genetic tests in the United States. It highlights recent changes in the regulatory culture regarding genetic tests that are sold to consumers, and discusses the impact on health care providers of selling and advertising genetic tests directly to consumers.

Attitudes toward direct-to-consumer advertisements and online genetic testing among high-risk women participating in a hereditary cancer clinic

Genetic testing for the breast cancer genes 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) has helped women determine their risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. As interest in genetic testing has grown, companies have created strategies to disseminate information about testing, including direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) and online genetic testing. This study examined attitudes toward DTCA and online testing for BRCA among 84 women at a high-risk clinic as well as additional factors that may be associated with these attitudes, such as personal and familial cancer history, cancer worry and risk perception, and history with genetic testing/counseling. Results showed that the majority of the women held favorable attitudes toward DTCA for BRCA testing but did not support online testing. Factors such as familial ovarian cancer, cancer worry, and satisfaction with genetic counseling/testing were associated with positive attitudes toward DTCA, whereas personal breast cancer history was related to negative attitudes. The findings suggest that women may view DTCA as informational but rely on physicians for help in their decision to undergo testing, and also suggest that cancer history may affect women's acceptance of DTCA and genetic testing.

The general public's understanding and perception of direct-to-consumer genetic test results

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing allows consumers to discover their risk for common complex disorders. The extent to which consumers understand typical results provided by DTC genetic testing is currently unknown. Misunderstanding of the results could lead to negative consequences including unnecessary concern, false reassurance or unwarranted changes in screening behaviors. We conducted a study to investigate consumers' perceptions and understanding of DTC test results.

METHODS

An online survey was posted on Facebook that included questions relating to 4 sample test results for risk of developing colorectal cancer, heart disease and skin cancer. Genetic counselors were used as a comparison group.

RESULTS

145 individuals from the general public and 171 genetic counselors completed the survey. A significant difference was found between the way the general public and genetic counselors interpreted the meaning of the DTC results. The general public respondents also believed that results in all 4 scenarios would be significantly more helpful than the genetic counselors did. Although the majority of general public respondents rated the results as easy to understand, they often misinterpreted them.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings imply that the general public has the potential to misinterpret DTC results without appropriate assistance. Further research is needed to explore optimal methods of providing DTC test results and ways to minimize the risk of negative consequences for consumers.

Parents' attitudes toward pediatric genetic testing for common disease risk

OBJECTIVE

To describe parents' attitudes toward pediatric genetic testing for common, adult-onset health conditions and to identify factors underlying these attitudes.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

Parents (n = 219) enrolled in a large, group-practice health plan were offered a "multiplex" genetic test for susceptibility to 8 common, adult-onset health conditions and completed an online survey assessing attitudes and beliefs about the risks and benefits of the test for their child, their willingness to consider having their child tested, and other psychosocial variables.

RESULTS

Parents viewed the benefits of pediatric testing to outweigh its risks (positive decisional balance) and were moderately interested in pediatric testing. Variables associated with positive decisional balance included greater interest in knowing about gene-health associations in their child, anticipation of less difficulty understanding their child's genetic health risks, and more positive emotional reactions to learning about their child's decreased health risks (adjusted R(2) = 0.33, P < .0001). Similarly, variables associated with greater parental willingness to test were being a mother (versus being a father), greater perceived risk of diseases in their child, greater interest in knowing about gene-health relationships in their child, anticipating less difficulty learning about their child's genetic health risks, anticipating more positive emotional reactions to learning about their child's decreased health risks, and positive decisional balance (adjusted R(2) = 0.57, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

As genetic susceptibility testing for common, adult-onset health conditions proliferates, pediatricians should anticipate parents' interest in testing children and be prepared to facilitate informed decision making about such testing.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: an assessment of genetic counselors' knowledge and beliefs

PURPOSE

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is a new means of obtaining genetic testing outside of a traditional clinical setting. This study assesses genetic counselors' experience, knowledge, and beliefs regarding direct-to-consumer genetic testing for tests that would currently be offered in genetics clinics.

METHODS

Members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors completed a web-administered survey in February 2008.

RESULTS

Response rate was 36%; the final data analysis included 312 respondents. Eighty-three percent of respondents had two or fewer inquiries about direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and 14% had received requests for test interpretation or discussion. Respondents believed that genetic counselors have a professional obligation to be knowledgeable about direct-to-consumer genetic testing (55%) and interpret results (48%). Fifty-one percent of respondents thought genetic testing should be limited to a clinical setting; 56% agreed direct-to-consumer genetic testing is acceptable if genetic counseling is provided. More than 70% of respondents would definitely or possibly consider direct-to-consumer testing for patients who (1) have concerns about genetic discrimination, (2) want anonymous testing, or (3) have geographic constraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that genetic counselors have limited patient experiences with direct-to-consumer genetic testing and are cautiously considering if and under what circumstances this approach should be used.

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.

Consumers' use of web-based information and their decisions about multiplex genetic susceptibility testing

BACKGROUND

Few data exist to inform concerns raised by online direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic susceptibility tests, such as those offered by commercial entities like 23andme, Navigenics, and DNA Direct. The Multiplex Initiative, a population-based study of healthy adults, provides the first opportunity to evaluate how use of a Web-based decision tool that conveyed information about a genetic susceptibility test influenced individuals' test decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To inform the ongoing debate over whether individuals offered genetic susceptibility testing without the involvement of a health care provider (eg, through direct-to-consumer testing) can make informed decisions about testing when guided by online decision aids.

METHODS

Participants were 526 members of a large health maintenance organization aged 25 to 40 years old who visited a study website. Multivariate logistic regression models were tested to examine the association of website usage with downstream test decisions.

RESULTS

Participants viewed an average of 2.9 of the 4 pages introducing the multiplex test, 2.2 of the 8 pages describing the health conditions, and 3.2 of the 15 pages describing the genes. For each page viewed, participants were more likely to describe their decision-making as easy (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.07) and to decide to be tested (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Healthy adults in this study perceived Web-based genomic information presented using evidence-based communications approaches to be helpful in supporting both decisions to test and not to test. Continued research is needed to ensure that these results generalize to target groups with lower literacy and less Internet savvy.

Canadian health care professionals' knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of nutritional genomics

Nutritional genomics has reached the public through applications of the Human Genome Project offered direct to consumers (DTC). The ability to pursue nutrigenetic testing without the involvement of a health care professional has received considerable attention from academic and policy commentators. To better understand the knowledge and attitudes of Canadian health care professionals regarding nutritional genomics and nutrigenetic testing, qualitative research in the form of focus group discussions was undertaken. Four key themes emerged: (1) concerns over DTC testing; (2) lack of health care professional competency; (3) genetic scepticism and inevitability; (4) expectation of regulation. Together, they indicate that health care professionals have little knowledge about nutritional genomics and hold contradictory attitudes towards genomics in general, and to nutritional genomics in particular. Respondents argue in favour of a delivery model where health care professionals act as intermediaries. They are also aware of their lack of competency to provide such services. To ensure greater public protection, respondents cite the importance of more stringent regulatory oversight of DTC genetic testing. Whether such an approach is necessary to address the various ethical and social issues raised by nutrigenetic testing remains an open debate.

Breast cancer in the personal genomics era

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with a complex etiology that develops from different cellular lineages, progresses along multiple molecular pathways, and demonstrates wide variability in response to treatment. The "standard of care" approach to breast cancer treatment in which all patients receive similar interventions is rapidly being replaced by personalized medicine, based on molecular characteristics of individual patients. Both inherited and somatic genomic variation is providing useful information for customizing treatment regimens for breast cancer to maximize efficacy and minimize adverse side effects. In this article, we review (1) hereditary breast cancer and current use of inherited susceptibility genes in patient management; (2) the potential of newly-identified breast cancer-susceptibility variants for improving risk assessment; (3) advantages and disadvantages of direct-to-consumer testing; (4) molecular characterization of sporadic breast cancer through immunohistochemistry and gene expression profiling and opportunities for personalized prognostics; and (5) pharmacogenomic influences on the effectiveness of current breast cancer treatments. Molecular genomics has the potential to revolutionize clinical practice and improve the lives of women with breast cancer.

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.

Negotiating the boundary between medicine and consumer culture: online marketing of nutrigenetic tests

Genomics researchers and policy makers have accused nutrigenetic testing companies--which provide DNA-based nutritional advice online--of misleading the public. The UK and USA regulation of the tests has hinged on whether they are classed as "medical" devices, and alternative regulatory categories for "lifestyle" and less-serious genetic tests have been proposed. This article presents the findings of a qualitative thematic analysis of the webpages of nine nutrigenetic testing companies. We argue that the companies, mirroring and negotiating the regulatory debates, were creating a new social space for products between medicine and consumer culture. This space was articulated through three themes: (i) how "genes" and tests were framed, (ii) how the individual was imagined vis a vis health information, and (iii) the advice and treatments offered. The themes mapped onto four frames or models for genetic testing: (i) clinical genetics, (ii) medicine, (iii) intermediate, and (iv) lifestyle. We suggest that the genomics researchers and policy makers appeared to perform what Gieryn (Gieryn, T.F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48, 781-795.) has termed "boundary work", i.e., to delegitimize the tests as outside proper medicine and science. Yet, they legitimated them, though in a different way, by defining them as lifestyle, and we contend that the transformation of the boundaries of science into a creation of such hybrid or compromise categories is symptomatic of current historical times. Social scientists studying medicine have referred to the emergence of "lifestyle" products. This article contributes to this literature by examining the historical, regulatory and marketing processes through which certain goods and services become defined this way.

Factors associated with preimplantation genetic diagnosis acceptance among women concerned about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

To assess sociodemographic, clinical, awareness, and attitudinal factors associated with acceptance of preimplantation genetic diagnosis among women concerned about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Participants (n = 962) were members of a national advocacy organization dedicated to empowering women at high risk for developing breast or ovarian cancer. Participants completed a web-based survey assessing factors associated with preimplantation genetic diagnosis acceptance. Factors significantly associated with acceptance in the bivariate analyses were used to build a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Among the 962 respondents, 318 (33.1%) selected the option that they would consider preimplantation genetic diagnosis, 367 (38.2%) would not consider preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and 277 (28.8%) selected "don't know." Significant predictors of preimplantation genetic diagnosis acceptance were the desire to have more children, having had a prenatal genetic test, preimplantation genetic diagnosis awareness, belief that preimplantation genetic diagnosis is acceptable for individuals at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, belief that preimplantation genetic diagnosis information should be given to individuals at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, concerns about preimplantation genetic diagnosis, perceived benefits of preimplantation genetic diagnosis, and how preimplantation genetic diagnosis is considered.

CONCLUSION

Women at increased risk for hereditary cancer may consider preimplantation genetic diagnosis as part of their reproductive decision making. Therefore, it is important to understand existing levels of awareness and attitudes toward this technology to provide optimal counseling and support.

Considerations for designing a prototype genetic test for use in translational research

BACKGROUND

Translational research is needed to explore how people will respond to personal genetic susceptibility information related to common health conditions. Maximizing the rigor of this research will require that genetic test results be returned to study participants. Currently, there is no established method that guides the selection of genetic variants to be used in research with these objectives.

METHODS AND RESULTS

To address this question, we designed a process to identify gene variants and health conditions to be included in a prototype genetic test for use in a larger research effort, the Multiplex Initiative. The intention of this exploration was to facilitate research that generates individual genetic test results that are returned to study participants. Inclusion criteria were developed as part of a transdisciplinary and iterative process that considered the weight of evidential support for genetic association with common health conditions, the appropriateness of use in human subjects research, and the recommendations of expert peer reviewers.

CONCLUSIONS

The selection process was designed to identify gene variants for the limited purpose of translational research and, therefore, should not be seen as producing a valid clinical test. However, this example of an applied selection process may provide guidance for researchers who are designing studies to evaluate the implications of genetic susceptibility testing through the return of personalized genetic information. As the rate of genomic discoveries increases, such research will be essential in steering the translation of this information towards the greatest public health benefit.

Nutrigenomics and ethics interface: direct-to-consumer services and commercial aspects

A growing variety and number of genetic tests are advertised and sold directly to consumers (DTC) via the Internet, including nutrigenomic tests and associated products and services. Consumers have more access to genetic information about themselves, but access does not entail certainty about the implications of test results. Potential personal and public health harms and benefits are associated with DTC access to genetic testing services. Early policy responses to direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing often involved calls for bans, and some jurisdictions prohibited DTC genetic tests. Recent policy responses by oversight bodies acknowledge expansion in the range of DTC tests available and suggest that a "one-size-fits-all" regulatory approach is not appropriate for all genetic tests. This review discusses ethical and regulatory aspects of DTC genetic testing, focusing particularly on nutrigenomic tests. We identify policy options for regulating DTC genetic tests, including full or partial prohibitions, enforcement of existing truth-in-advertising laws, and more comprehensive information disclosure about genetic tests. We advocate the latter option as an important means to improve transparency about current evidence on the strengths and limits of gene-disease associations and allow consumers to make informed purchasing decisions in the DTC marketplace.

The on-line promotion and sale of nutrigenomic services

PURPOSE

Nutrigenomic researchers hope to improve health through personalized nutrition, but many consider the sale of nutrigenomic services to be premature. Few studies have evaluated the promotion and sales practices of organizations hosting nutrigenomic websites.

METHODS

Systematic search and analysis of websites promoting nutrigenomic services in October 2006.

RESULTS

Of the 64 organizations hosting websites, 29 organizations offered (24 of 29) or promoted (5 of 29) at-home testing and 26 organizations sold services on-line (17 of 26) or provided a direct link to on-line sales (9 of 26). A lack of transparency made it difficult to identify unique tests; however, three organizations were linked to 56% of all test mentions. Most organizations were healthcare/wellness service providers (50%) or laboratories/biotech companies (27%). Few organizations provided on-line information about laboratory certifications (20%), nutrigenomic test or research limitations (13%), test validity or utility (11%), or genetic counseling (9%). Affiliation opportunities were offered by 15 organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Organizations did not provide adequate information about nutrigenomic services and at-home genetic testing. Affiliation opportunities and distribution agreements suggest the promotion and sale of nutrigenomic services will continue, increasing the importance of consumer and provider education. In absence of federal regulation, organizations promoting nutrigenomic services should equate websites to product labels and include information to facilitate informed decision-making.

Public health genomics: translating obesity genomics research into population health benefits

We examine how a public health genomics framework can be used to move genomic discoveries into clinical and public health practice for obesity prevention and treatment. There are four phases of translational research: T1: discovery to candidate health application; T2: health application to evidence-based practice guidelines; T3: practice guidelines to health practice; and T4: practice to population health impact. Types of multidisciplinary research and knowledge synthesis needed for each phase, as well as the importance of developing and disseminating evidence-based guidelines, are discussed. Because obesity genomics research is mostly in the discovery phase or in the very early phases of translation (T1), the authors present this framework to illustrate the range of translation activities needed to move genomic discoveries in obesity to actual applications that reduce the burden of obesity at the population level.