Genetics in clinical practice: general practitioners' educational priorities in European countries

Following NCCN guidelines within one hospital system in the United States: Comparison between cancer centers and genetic counselor utilization

Genetic testing is an instrumental tool used to determine whether an individual has a predisposition to certain cancers. Knowing of a hereditary cancer predisposition may allow a patient and their family to consider high-risk screening or risk-reducing options. Genetic counselors work with physicians to identify patients at increased risk for genetic testing using available guidelines such as those provided by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Information within one hospital system's cancer registry was used to identify individuals who qualify for genetic testing. This includes patients with a history of cancer of the breast (diagnosis ≤45, triple negative (TN) ≤60, and male), ovaries, colon (diagnosis ≤50), or uterus (diagnosis ≤50). Within this hospital system's registry, there are six cancer centers. Data were collected from cancer centers that utilized genetic counselors (GCs), and cancer centers that did not (non-GC) to determine whether there was a difference in genetic testing rates between GC and non-GC cancer centers. An analysis of 695 patients demonstrated a significantly higher proportion of eligible patients undergoing genetic testing at the GC cancer centers than at the non-GC cancer centers (91.6% versus 68.7%, p < .001). Further analysis of specific cancers showed a significantly higher uptake of genetic testing for eligible patients with colon cancer (90.8% versus 50%, p < .001), breast cancer ≤45 (99.5% versus 86%, p < .001), and ovarian cancer (91.3% versus 62.8%, p < .001) at the GC cancer centers than at the non-GC cancer centers. There was no significant difference in the proportion of testing of TN breast cancer ≤60 or uterine cancer ≤50 between cancer centers. These data suggest that having a GC working within a cancer center increases the ability to identify and offer testing to patients who meet NCCN genetic testing criteria based on their cancer type.

Veterinarians' Competence in Applying Basic Genetic Principles and Daily Implementation of Clinical Genetics: A Study in a University Environment

Veterinarian competency in genetics is vital for a meaningful application of the rapidly growing number of genetic tests available for animals. We evaluated the use of genetic tests in the daily veterinary practice and the competency of university-employed veterinarians in applying basic principles of genetics in a clinical setting through an electronic survey with 14 cases and 7 statements on genetics. Ninety-one non-geneticist veterinarians from two veterinary faculties in two different countries responded. Almost half of the participants apply genetic tests during their daily work, with frequencies varying between weekly and once a year. The most common indication to request a genetic test was diagnostic testing of clinically ill patients. Although 80% of the veterinarians communicated the result of a genetic test themselves, only 56% of them found it "very to rather easy" to find the correct test, and only 32% of them always felt competent to interpret the result of the test. The number of correctly answered questions varied widely, with median scores of 9/14 (range 0-14) and 5/7 (range 0-7) for the cases and statements, respectively. Most difficulties were seen with recognition of pedigree inheritance patterns, while veterinarians scored better in breeding advice and probability of disease estimations. Veterinarians scored best on questions related to autosomal recessive inheritance, followed by complex, autosomal dominant, X-linked recessive, and X-linked dominant inheritance. This study exposed pain points in veterinarians' knowledge and has led to the formulation of recommendations for future education and communication between laboratories, geneticists, and veterinarians.

Genetics-Related Activities in Everyday Practice of Family Physicians in Slovenia

INTRODUCTION

Development of genomic technologies has an important impact on patient management in medicine. Nevertheless, translation of new advances of genomic medicine in primary care is challenging and needs to be adapted to the needs of health systems.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to analyze the current state of the use and the level of confidence in genetic management activities in everyday clinical practice of family practitioners (FPs) in Slovenia.

METHODS

We used a cross-sectional observational study design. The dataset was obtained through a questionnaire containing demographics, questions about the use of genetics in everyday practice, and a scale for measuring the responders' confidence in their ability to carry out basic genetic activities during patient treatment. The questionnaire was sent by regular mail to every FP in Slovenia (N = 950).

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by a total of 271 physicians (response rate 28.5%), with an average physicians' age of 45.5 ± 10.6 years. In their everyday clinical practice, the majority of Slovenian FPs report to encounter genetic conditions more than once a month (241, 91.2%). Family medical history is the most commonly used among all activities related to genetic management of patients. Only 5.9% of Slovenian FPs are confident in their ability to carry out basic activities related to genetic patient management. Most of them believe they are only competent enough to obtain family medical history and identify a positive family history. The FPs who reported a lower degree of confidence are those with the lowest level of education in the field of medical genetics and older physicians (age >50 years).

CONCLUSIONS

Slovenian family physicians commonly encounter patients with genetic conditions but are not confident in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks. Therefore, additional education is necessary.

Primary care providers' lived experiences of genetics in practice

To effectively translate genetic advances into practice, engagement of primary care providers (PCPs) is essential. Using a qualitative, phenomenological methodology, we analyzed key informant interviews and focus groups designed to explore perspectives of urban and rural PCPs. PCPs endorsed a responsibility to integrate genetics into their practices and expected advances in genetic medicine to expand. However, PCPs reported limited knowledge and difficulties accessing resources, experts, and continuing education. Rural practitioners’ additional concerns included cost, distance, and poor patient engagement. PCPs’ perspectives are crucial to develop relevant educational and systems-based interventions to further expand genetic medicine in primary care.

ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE AND PRACTICE TOWARDS CONSANGUINEOUS MARRIAGES AMONG A COHORT OF MULTIETHNIC HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS IN SAUDI ARABIA

This study aimed to assess knowledge, attitude and practice related to consanguinity among multiethnic health care providers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Using a cross-sectional study design, a validated, self-administered close-ended questionnaire was randomly distributed to health care providers in different health institutions in the country between 1st August 2012 and 31st July 2013. A total of 1235 health care providers completed the study questionnaire. Of the 892 married participants (72.23% of total), 11.43% were married to a first cousin, and were predominantly Arabs, younger than 40 years and male. Only 17.80% of the patients seen by the health care providers requested consanguinity related counselling. A knowledge barrier was expressed by 27.49% of the participants, and 85.67% indicated their willingness to have more training in basic genetic counselling. A language barrier was expressed as a limiting factor to counselling for consanguinity among non-Arabs. The health care providers had a major dearth of knowledge that was reflected in their attitude and practice towards consanguinity counselling. This finding indicates the need for more undergraduate and postgraduate medical and nursing education and training in the counselling of consanguineous couples. It is recommended that consanguinity counselling is included in the current premarital screening and counselling programmes in the Kingdom.

A systematic review of interventions to provide genetics education for primary care

BACKGROUND

At least 10 % of patients seen in primary care are said to have a condition in which genetics has an influence. However, patients at risk of genetic disease may not be recognised, while those who seek advice may not be referred or managed appropriately. Primary care practitioners lack knowledge of genetics and genetic testing relevant for daily practice and feel inadequate to deliver genetic services. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate genetics educational interventions in the context of primary care.

METHODS

Following the process for systematic reviews developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we conducted a search of five relevant electronic databases. Primary research papers were eligible for inclusion if they included data on outcomes of interventions regarding genetics education for primary care practitioners. The results from each paper were coded and grouped under themes.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the review. The five major themes identified inductively (post hoc) were: prior experience, changes in confidence, changes in knowledge, changes in practice, satisfaction and feedback. In five of the studies, knowledge of practitioners was improved following the educational programmes, but this tended to be in specific topic areas, while practitioner confidence improved in six studies. However, there was little apparent change to practice.

CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient studies of relevant quality to inform educational interventions in genetics for primary care practitioners. Educational initiatives should be assessed using changes in practice, as well as in confidence and knowledge, to determine if they are effective in causing significant changes in practice in genetic risk assessment and appropriate management of patients.

General Practitioners and Breast Surgeons in France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK show variable breast cancer risk communication profiles

BACKGROUND

No information is available on the attitudes of General Practitioners (GPs) and Breast Surgeons (BSs) to their delivery of genetic, environmental and lifestyle risk factor information about breast cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the Breast Cancer Risk Communication Behaviours (RCBs) reported by GPs and BSs in four European countries and to determine the relationships between their RCBs and their socio-occupational characteristics.

METHODS

Self-administered questionnaires assessing breast cancer risk communication behaviours using vignettes were mailed to a sample of Breast Surgeons (BS) and General Practitioners (GP) working in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7292). Their responses to questions about the risk factors were first ordered and compared by specialty and country after making multivariate adjustments. Rather than defining a standard Risk Presentation Format (RPF) a priori, the various RPFs used by the respondents were analyzed using cluster analysis.

RESULTS

Family history and hormonal replacement therapy were the risk factors most frequently mentioned by the 2094 respondents included in this study. Lifestyle BC risk factors such as obesity and alcohol were rarely/occasionally mentioned, but this point differed (p < 0.001) depending on the country and the specialty of the providers involved. Five distinct RPF profiles including the numerical/verbal presentation of absolute/relative risks were identified. The most frequently encountered RPF (34.2%) was characterized by the fact that it included no negative framing of the risks, i.e., the probability of not developing cancer was not mentioned. Age, specialty and country of practice were all found to be significant determinants of the RPF clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing trend for GPs and BSs to discuss lifestyle risk factors with their patients suggests that this may be a relevant means of improving breast cancer prevention. Physicians' risk communication skills should be improved during their initial and vocational training.

Family physicians' management of genetic aspects of a cardiac disease: a scenario-based study from slovenia

The aim of this study was to find out how Slovenian family physicians (FPs) would manage a hypothetical clinical case, to explore their views about possible ethical dilemmas associated with this clinical case and to determine possible associations with demographic and other characteristics of FPs. This was an observational cross-sectional postal study in the Slovenian FPs' surgeries. The study population consisted of the whole population of Slovenian FPs (n = 950). The main outcome measures were the percentages of the answers of FPs on different questions about the clinical case on the management of patient and his relative with hereditary cardiomyopathy. There were 271 FPs who answered the questionnaire (response rate was 27.1%). A sample included 66 (24.4%) men and the mean age of all respondents was 45.5 ± 10.6 years. When dealing with the clinical case, most FPs expressed willingness to take the patient's family history. Only 34.2% FPs did not believe that ordering genetic tests was part of their job. Additionally, only 50.0% of them felt competent to interpret the genetic risk, 25.0% of them would give information about genetic testing and only 6.0% would interpret the results of the genetic testing. Family physicians in Slovenia were willing to include genetic tasks into routine management of their patients, but they do not feel competent enough to interpret the genetic risks and the results of genetic testing. However, an important part of FPs would not refer patients at risk to genetic counseling. The inclusion of genetic topics to family medicine specialization curriculum is needed.

Family physicians' self-perceived importance of providing genetic test information to patients: a cross-sectional study from Slovenia

BACKGROUND

Management of patients with genetic problems, including provision of genetic testing, is increasingly becoming a part of primary health care. The aim of this study was to determine the family physicians' (FPs) self-perceived importance of providing genetic test information to their patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was an observational cross-sectional postal study in the whole population of Slovenian family physicians (N=950). Its main outcome measure was the perceived importance of providing genetic test information on each of 10 items on a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

There were 271 (27.1% response rate) FPs that completed the questionnaire, out of which 205 (75.6%) were women. Mean age of the sample was 45.5 ± 10.6 years. More than 90% of Slovene FPs felt that it was their professional duty to discuss genetic testing issues with their patients. They were particularly prone to discuss clinical implications of positive and negative test results, as well as giving the patients information about the risk of passing a mutation onto children.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Slovene family physicians feel responsible and willing to offer and discuss genetic testing and implications with their patients. Additional education should be provided to empower them for this task.

Cancer risk communication, predictive testing and management in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK: general practitioners' and breast surgeons' current practice and preferred practice responsibilities

Genetic testing has its greatest public health value when it identifies individuals who will benefit from specific interventions based upon their risk. This paradigm is the basis for the use of predictive tests, such as BRCA1/BRCA2 testing which has become part of clinical practice for more than a decade. Currently predictive BRCA1/BRCA2 testing is offered to women using low, moderate and high risk based upon family history as cut-off levels. Non-genetic health professionals such as general practitioners (GPs) and breast surgeons (BS) are seen as gatekeepers to manage demand and/or facilitate access to appropriate services for high-risk patients. Data about current practices are lacking. The paper presents data on the current practice of GPs' and BS' cancer risk assessment, referral practices and preferred practice responsibilities for women at risk for familial breast cancer in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK derived by a self-administered questionnaire send to a representative sample of GPs and BS in the four countries. One thousand one hundred ninety-seven GPs and 1,223 BS completed the questionnaire. Both GPs and BS reported that they are consulted by a considerable number of patients presenting with concerns about a family history of cancer. Both commonalities and striking differences could be observed between GPs and BS from the four participating countries. GPs from France and Germany reported significantly higher proportions taking a family history of cancer including the extended family than GPs from the Netherlands and the UK. Most GPs from France, Germany and the Netherlands stated their willingness for providing risk assessment for an unaffected (high-risk) woman with a family history of breast cancer and the vast majority of BS from all four countries reported that they themselves would provide risk assessment for an unaffected (high-risk) woman with a family history of breast cancer. However, a substantial number of both GPs and BS would not have taken an appropriate family history for their patient failing to take into account the paternal side of the family. GPs from Germany reported a significantly lower readiness to refer a patient with a family history of a BRCA1 mutation for specialist genetic counselling when compared to the GPs from the other countries. GPs and BS from France, Germany and the Netherlands significantly less often assigned practice responsibilities to a genetic specialist as compared to the participating GPs and BS from the UK. The outcome of the study confirms the need for capability building in genetics for non-genetic health professionals. Using genetic risk assessment tools without a full understanding could result in missed opportunities for cancer prevention and harm patients. In order to provide best possible services for high-risk patients presenting with cancer concerns, close collaboration with clinical geneticists should become routine part of mainstream medical practice.

The use of family history in primary health care: a qualitative study

The aim of this study is to describe how Belgian family physicians register and use the family history data of their patients in daily practice. Qualitative in-depth semistructured one-to-one interviews were conducted including 16 family physicians in Belgium. These interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed. Recurring themes were identified and compared with findings from the existing literature. All interviewed family physicians considered the family history as an important part of the medical records. Half of the surveyed physicians confirmed knowing the family history of at least 50% of their patients. The data on family history were mainly collected during the first consultations with the patient. The majority of physicians did not use a standardised questionnaire or form to collect and to record the family history. To estimate the impact of a family history, physicians seldom use official guidance or resources. Physicians perceived a lack of time and unreliable information provided by their patients as obstacles to collect and interpret the family history. Solutions that foster the use of family history data were identified at the level of the physician and also included the development of specific instruments integrated within the electronic medical record.

A primary care specialist genetics service: a cluster-randomised factorial trial

BACKGROUND

GPs do not have the confidence to identify patients at increased genetic risk. A specialist primary care clinical genetics service could support GPs with referral and provide local clinics for their patients.

AIM

To test whether primary care genetic-led genetics education improves both non-cancer and cancer referral rates, and primary care-led genetics clinics improve the patient pathway.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cluster-randomised factorial trial in 73 general practices in the south of England.

METHOD

Practices randomised to receive case scenario based seminar (intervention) or not (control), and referred patients a primary (intervention) or secondary (control) care genetic counsellor (GC)-led appointment.

OUTCOME MEASURES

GP referral and clinic attendance rates (primary), appropriate cancer and case scenario referral rates, patient satisfaction, clinic costs, and case management (secondary).

RESULTS

Eighty-nine and 68 referrals made by 36 intervention and 37 control practices respectively. There was a trend towards an overall higher referral rate among educated GPs (referral rate ratio [RRR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89 to 2.02; P = 0.161), and they made more appropriate cancer referrals (RRR 2.36, 95% CI = 1.07 to 5.24; P = 0.035). No indication of difference in clinic attendance rates (odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.95; P = 0.802) or patient satisfaction (P = 0.189). Patients spent 49% less travelling (£3.60 versus £6.62; P<0.001) and took 33% less time (39.7 versus 57.7 minutes; P<0.001) to attend a primary than secondary care appointment; 83% of GC-managed appointments met the 18-week referral to treatment, NHS target.

CONCLUSION

An integrated primary care genetics service both supports GPs in appropriate cancer referral and provides care in the right place by the right person.

Immune Reactions following Cord Blood Transplantations in Adults

Cord blood transplantation (CBT) is an attractive alternative therapy in adult patients with advanced hematological malignancies in whom matched donors are unavailable. However, the risk of complications, especially infections, post-CBT increases the mortality rates in these patients. Although the incidence of acute and chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD) post-CBT is lower than that following bone marrow transplantation and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (SCT), the additional immunosuppressive therapy required to treat it could increase the mortality in these patients. Further, chronic GVHD following CBT is milder and responds better to treatment than that occurring after bone marrow transplants. Unlike bone marrow transplantation, the onset of GVHD is a positive prognostic indicator of overall survival in patients receiving CBT, due to the graft versus malignancy (GVM) effect. This paper focuses on the immune reactions following CBT and aims to elucidate a management strategy for acute and chronic GVHD.

General practitioner management of genetic aspects of a cardiac disease: a scenario-based study to anticipate providers' practices

It is increasingly recognised that genetics will have to be integrated into all parts of primary health care. Previous research has demonstrated that involvement and confidence in genetics varies amongst primary care providers. We aimed to analyse perceptions of primary care providers regarding responsibility for genetic tasks and factors affecting those perceptions. Postal questionnaire including a hypothetical case management scenario of a cardiac condition with a genetic component was sent to random samples of medically qualified general practitioners in France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and UK (n = 1,168). Logistic regression analysis of factors affecting primary care practitioners' willingness to carry out genetic tasks themselves was conducted; 61% would take a family history themselves but only 38% would explain an inheritance pattern and 16% would order a genetic test. In multivariate analysis, only the country of practice was consistently predictive of willingness to carry out genetic tasks, although male gender predicted willingness to carry out the majority of tasks studied. The stage of career at which education in genetics had been provided was not predictive of willingness to carry out any of the tasks analysed. Country of practice is significantly predictive of attitudes towards genetics in primary care practice and therefore genetic education structure and content in Europe will need to be significantly tailored towards country-specific approaches.

Genetic educational needs and the role of genetics in primary care: a focus group study with multiple perspectives

BACKGROUND

Available evidence suggests that improvements in genetics education are needed to prepare primary care providers for the impact of ongoing rapid advances in genomics. Postgraduate (physician training) and master (midwifery training) programmes in primary care and public health are failing to meet these perceived educational needs. The aim of this study was to explore the role of genetics in primary care (i.e. family medicine and midwifery care) and the need for education in this area as perceived by primary care providers, patient advocacy groups and clinical genetics professionals.

METHODS

Forty-four participants took part in three types of focus groups: mono-disciplinary groups of general practitioners and midwives, respectively and multidisciplinary groups composed of a diverse set of experts. The focus group sessions were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis. Recurrent themes were identified.

RESULTS

Four themes emerged regarding the educational needs and the role of genetics in primary care: (1) genetics knowledge, (2) family history, (3) ethical dilemmas and psychosocial effects in relation to genetics and (4) insight into the organisation and role of clinical genetics services. These themes reflect a shift in the role of genetics in primary care with implications for education. Although all focus group participants acknowledged the importance of genetics education, general practitioners felt this need more urgently than midwives and more strongly emphasized their perceived knowledge deficiencies.

CONCLUSION

The responsibilities of primary care providers with regard to genetics require further study. The results of this study will help to develop effective genetics education strategies to improve primary care providers' competencies in this area. More research into the educational priorities in genetics is needed to design courses that are suitable for postgraduate and master programmes for general practitioners and midwives.

Confidence of primary care physicians in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks-a European survey in five countries-Part 1

Western health care systems are facing today increasing movement of genetic knowledge from research labs into clinical practice. This paper reports the results of a survey that addressed the confidence of primary care physicians in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks. The survey was conducted in five countries (France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK). Stratified random samples were drawn from primary care physicians in the five countries representing a sampling frame of 139,579 physicians. Stepwise binary logistic regression procedures were performed to identify the predictor variables for self-reported confidence. Three thousand six hundred eighty-six physicians participated and filled out a self-administered questionnaire. The margin of error for accurate representation of each group of European general practitioners and specialists in the total sample is 2.9% for GP, 2.8% for obstetricians/gynaecologists (OB/GYN) and for paediatricians (PAED) 2.6% (95% confidence level). Confidence in their ability to carry out basic medical genetic tasks is low among participating primary care physicians: 44.2% are not confident, 36.5% somewhat confident, confident or very confident are 19.3%. In each country, those confident/very confident represent less than 33% of the participating physicians. Primary care physicians who report the lowest levels of confidence prove to be those least exposed to medical genetics information and training. Although there are significant differences in the way in which professional education is organised and practice is regulated across European countries, there is a need for a coordinated European effort to improve primary care physicians' background in medical genetics.

Realities and expectations of pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: impact of translating genetic knowledge into clinical practice

The implementation of genetic data for a better prediction of response to medications and adverse drug reactions is becoming a reality in some clinical fields. However, to be successful, personalized medicine should take advantage of an informational structured framework of genetic, phenotypic and environmental factors in order to provide the healthcare system with useful tools that can optimize the effectiveness of specific treatment. The impact of personalized medicine is potentially enormous, but the results that have so far been gathered are often difficult to translate into clinical practice. In this article we have summarized the most relevant applications of pharmacogenomics on diseases to which they have already been applied and fields in which they are currently emerging. The article provides an overview of the opportunities and shortcomings of the implementation of genetic information into personalized medicine and its full adoption in the clinic. In the second instance, it provides readers from different fields of expertise with an accessible interpretation to the barriers and opportunities in the use/adoption of pharmacogenomic testing between the different clinical areas.

Enabling personalized medicine through the use of healthcare information technology

To achieve the goal of personalized medicine, advances in healthcare information technology (HIT) must be accompanied by similar advances in data analysis and translation into clinical care. For healthcare providers and their patients, advances in genomics and other related fields must be captured by sophisticated decision support systems that integrate information from multiple sources of data and facilitate their use in the clinic. In addition to addressing privacy concerns, regulators will also need to work toward establishing evidentiary standards for the use of data from electronic clinical sources in areas such as comparative effectiveness and safety, while addressing the complexity behind the genetic basis of the exceptions to their general findings. Overall, the increased use of HIT will allow for a more integrated, efficient system for collecting and analyzing clinical data, providing a fruitful environment for hypothesis testing and generation, as well as leading to more personalized and effective healthcare.

Interpretation of genetic association studies: markers with replicated highly significant odds ratios may be poor classifiers

Recent successful discoveries of potentially causal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for complex diseases hold great promise, and commercialization of genomics in personalized medicine has already begun. The hope is that genetic testing will benefit patients and their families, and encourage positive lifestyle changes and guide clinical decisions. However, for many complex diseases, it is arguable whether the era of genomics in personalized medicine is here yet. We focus on the clinical validity of genetic testing with an emphasis on two popular statistical methods for evaluating markers. The two methods, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, are applied to our age-related macular degeneration dataset. By using an additive model of the CFH, LOC387715, and C2 variants, the odds ratios are 2.9, 3.4, and 0.4, with p-values of 10⁻¹³, 10⁻¹³, and 10⁻³, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) is 0.79, but assuming prevalences of 15%, 5.5%, and 1.5% (which are realistic for age groups 80 y, 65 y, and 40 y and older, respectively), only 30%, 12%, and 3% of the group classified as high risk are cases. Additionally, we present examples for four other diseases for which strongly associated variants have been discovered. In type 2 diabetes, our classification model of 12 SNPs has an AUC of only 0.64, and two SNPs achieve an AUC of only 0.56 for prostate cancer. Nine SNPs were not sufficient to improve the discrimination power over that of nongenetic predictors for risk of cardiovascular events. Finally, in Crohn's disease, a model of five SNPs, one with a quite low odds ratio of 0.26, has an AUC of only 0.66. Our analyses and examples show that strong association, although very valuable for establishing etiological hypotheses, does not guarantee effective discrimination between cases and controls. The scientific community should be cautious to avoid overstating the value of association findings in terms of personalized medicine before their time.