The FDA authorization of direct-to-consumer genetic testing for three BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants: a twitter analysis of the public's response

Understanding changes in genetic literacy over time and in genetic research participants

As genomic and personalized medicine becomes mainstream, assessing and understanding the public's genetic literacy is paramount. Because genetic research drives innovation and involves much of the public, it is equally important to assess its impact on genetic literacy. We designed a survey to assess genetic literacy in three ways (familiarity, knowledge, and skills) and distributed it to two distinct samples: 2,050 members of the general population and 2,023 individuals currently enrolled in a large-scale genetic research study. We compared these data to a similar survey implemented in 2013. The results indicate that familiarity with basic genetic terms in 2021 (M = 5.36 [range 1-7], p < 0.001) and knowledge of genetic concepts in 2021 (M = 9.06 [56.6% correct], p = 0.002) are significantly higher compared to 2013 (familiarity: M = 5.08 [range 1-7]; knowledge: M = 8.72 [54.5% correct]). Those currently enrolled in a genetic study were also significantly more familiar with genetic terms (M = 5.79 [range 1-7], p < 0.001) and more knowledgeable of genetic concepts (M = 10.57 [66.1% correct], p < 0.001), and they scored higher in skills (M = 3.57 [59.5% correct], p < 0.001) than the general population (M = 5.36 [range 1-7]; M = 9.06 [56.6% correct]; M = 2.65 [44.2% correct]). The results suggest that genetic literacy is improving over time, with room for improvement. We conclude that educational interventions are needed to ensure familiarity with and comprehension of basic genetic concepts and suggest further exploration of the impact of genetic research participation on genetic literacy to determine mechanisms for potential interventions.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing on Social Media: Topic Modeling and Sentiment Analysis of YouTube Users' Comments

Background

With direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing enabling self-responsible access to novel information on ancestry, traits, or health, consumers often turn to social media for assistance and discussion. YouTube, the largest social media platform for videos, offers an abundance of DTC genetic testing-related videos. Nevertheless, user discourse in the comments sections of these videos is largely unexplored.

Objective

This study aims to address the lack of knowledge concerning user discourse in the comments sections of DTC genetic testing-related videos on YouTube by exploring topics discussed and users' attitudes toward these videos.

Methods

We employed a 3-step research approach. First, we collected metadata and comments of the 248 most viewed DTC genetic testing-related videos on YouTube. Second, we conducted topic modeling using word frequency analysis, bigram analysis, and structural topic modeling to identify topics discussed in the comments sections of those videos. Finally, we employed Bing (binary), National Research Council Canada (NRC) emotion, and 9-level sentiment analysis to identify users' attitudes toward these DTC genetic testing-related videos, as expressed in their comments.

Results

We collected 84,082 comments from the 248 most viewed DTC genetic testing-related YouTube videos. With topic modeling, we identified 6 prevailing topics on (1) general genetic testing, (2) ancestry testing, (3) relationship testing, (4) health and trait testing, (5) ethical concerns, and (6) YouTube video reaction. Further, our sentiment analysis indicates strong positive emotions (anticipation, joy, surprise, and trust) and a neutral-to-positive attitude toward DTC genetic testing-related videos.

Conclusions

With this study, we demonstrate how to identify users' attitudes on DTC genetic testing by examining topics and opinions based on YouTube video comments. Shedding light on user discourse on social media, our findings suggest that users are highly interested in DTC genetic testing and related social media content. Nonetheless, with this novel market constantly evolving, service providers, content providers, or regulatory authorities may still need to adapt their services to users' interests and desires.

Mini-Review: Genetic Literacy and Engagement With Genetic Testing for Autism Spectrum Disorder

As genomic and personalized medicine is integrated into healthcare, the need for patients to understand and make decisions about their own genetic makeup increases. Genetic literacy, or one’s knowledge of genetic principles and their applications, measures an individual’s ability to apply genetic information to their own treatment. Increased genetic literacy can improve comprehension of genetic tests and therefore increase participation in testing to detect and treat genetic disorders. It can also help providers understand and explain genetic information to their patients. However, current research indicates that the population’s genetic literacy is generally low. Because many medical students, providers, and patients cannot adequately apply genetic information to their health, new and beneficial genetic technologies can be underused. More specifically, though genetic testing is recommended at the time of diagnosis for those affected by autism spectrum disorder (ASD), as few as 22% of families undergo genetic testing after diagnosis. While ASD, a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by impaired social communication and restricted interests, has both genetic and environmental risk, genetic testing can give clinicians useful information and help families avoid potentially painful and costly tests, even when many families do not receive a “positive” genetic result through microarrays or gene panels. Improving genetic literacy in populations affected by ASD can also improve attitudes toward genetic testing, thereby ensuring access to genetic health risk information. In this mini review, we discuss the current literature describing genetic literacy and genetic testing rates for ASD.

Genetic Privacy and Data Protection: A Review of Chinese Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Services

Background

The existing literature has not examined how Chinese direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing providers navigate the issues of informed consent, privacy, and data protection associated with testing services. This research aims to explore these questions by examining the relevant documents and messages published on websites of the Chinese DTC genetic test providers.

Methods

Using Baidu.com, the most popular Chinese search engine, we compiled the websites of providers who offer genetic testing services and analyzed available documents related to informed consent, the terms of services, and the privacy policy. The analyses were guided by the following inquiries as they applied to each DTC provider: the methods available for purchasing testing products; the methods providers used to obtain informed consent; privacy issues and measures for protecting consumers’ health information; the policy for third-party data sharing; consumers right to their data; and the liabilities in the event of a data breach.

Results

68.7% of providers offer multiple channels for purchasing genetic testing products, and that social media has become a popular platform to promote testing services. Informed consent forms are not available on 94% of providers’ websites and a privacy policy is only offered by 45.8% of DTC genetic testing providers. Thirty-nine providers stated that they used measures to protect consumers’ information, of which, 29 providers have distinguished consumers’ general personal information from their genetic information. In 33.7% of the cases examined, providers stated that with consumers’ explicit permission, they could reuse and share the clients’ information for non-commercial purposes. Twenty-three providers granted consumer rights to their health information, with the most frequently mentioned right being the consumers’ right to decide how their data can be used by providers. Lastly, 21.7% of providers clearly stated their liabilities in the event of a data breach, placing more emphasis on the providers’ exemption from any liability.

Conclusions

Currently, the Chinese DTC genetic testing business is running in a regulatory vacuum, governed by self-regulation. The government should develop a comprehensive legal framework to regulate DTC genetic testing offerings. Regulatory improvements should be made based on periodical reviews of the supervisory strategy to meet the rapid development of the DTC genetic testing industry.