Regulating direct-to-consumer genetic tests: what is all the fuss about?

Policy Guidance for Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Services: Framework Development Study

BACKGROUND

The online offer of commercial genetic tests, also called direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GTs), enables citizens to gain insight into their health and disease risk based on their genetic profiles. DTC-GT offers often consist of a combination of services or aspects, including advertisements, information, DNA analysis, and medical or lifestyle advice. The risks and benefits of DTC-GT services have been debated and studied extensively, but instruments that assess DTC-GT services and aid policy are lacking. This leads to uncertainty among policy makers, law enforcers, and regulators on how to ensure and balance both public safety and autonomy and about the responsibilities these 3 parties have toward the public.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a framework that outlines aspects of DTC-GTs that lead to policy issues and to help provide policy guidance regarding DTC-GT services.

METHODS

We performed 3 steps: (1) an integrative literature review to identify risks and benefits of DTC-GT services for consumers and society in Embase and Medline (January 2014-June 2022), (2) structuring benefits and risks in different steps of the consumer journey, and (3) development of a checklist for policy guidance.

RESULTS

Potential risks and benefits of DTC-GT services were mapped from 134 papers and structured into 6 phases. In summary, these phases were called the consumer journey: (1) exposure, (2) pretest information, (3) DNA analysis, (4) data management, (5) posttest information, and (6) individual and societal impact. The checklist for evaluation of DTC-GT services consisted of 8 themes, covering 38 items that may raise policy issues in DTC-GT services. The themes included the following aspects: general service content, validity and quality assurance, potential data and privacy risks, scientific evidence and robustness, and quality of the provided information.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the consumer journey and the checklist break the DTC-GT offer down into key aspects that may impact and compromise individual and public health, safety, and autonomy. This framework helps policy makers, regulators, and law enforcers develop methods to interpret, assess, and act in the DTC-GT service market.

Polygenic Scores in the Direct-to-Consumer Setting: Challenges and Opportunities for a New Era in Consumer Genetic Testing

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests have generated considerable scholarly attention and public intrigue. Although the current consumer genetic testing regime relies on the reporting of individual variants of interest to consumers, there has recently been interest in the possibility of integrating polygenic scores (PGS), which aggregate genetic liability for disease across the entire genome. While PGS have thus far been extensively explored as clinical and public health tools, the use of PGS in consumer genetic testing has not yet received systematic attention, even though they are already in use for some consumer genetic tests. In this narrative review, we highlight the ethical, legal, and social implications of the use of PGS in DTC genetic tests and synthesize existing solutions to these concerns. We organize these concerns into three domains: (1) industry variation; (2) privacy and commercialization; and (3) patient safety and risk. While previously expressed concerns in these domains will remain relevant, the emergence of PGS-based DTC genetic tests raises challenges that will require novel approaches.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing in South Africa: Stumbling Over the First Legal Hurdle?

Despite the growing popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic testing, there is minimal South African literature on the topic. The limited available research suggests that direct-to-consumer genetic testing is unregulated. However, we suggest that direct-to-consumer genetic testing is indeed regulated, and unusually so. The first step in the process - the collection of a saliva sample by consumers themselves - is unlawful on a plain reading of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and the Regulations Relating to the Use of Human Biological Material. This is because these statutes require that certain healthcare professionals must remove saliva for genetic testing. Yet, on closer analysis, such an apparent ban on the self-collection of saliva is neither aligned with a purposive interpretation of the relevant legislation, nor would it survive constitutional scrutiny - as it impedes an individual's autonomy. It is concluded that, contrary to a plain reading of the relevant statutes, individuals can lawfully collect their own saliva for direct-to-consumer genetic testing. To provide legal clarity we recommend that the relevant provisions of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and Regulations Relating to the Use of Human Biological the Material be amended to allow individuals to collect their own saliva samples.

Genomic health data generation in the UK: a 360 view

In the UK, genomic health data is being generated in three major contexts: the healthcare system (based on clinical indication), in large scale research programmes, and for purchasers of direct-to-consumer genetic tests. The recently delivered hybrid clinical/research programme, 100,000 Genomes Project set the scene for a new Genomic Medicine Service, through which the National Health Service aims to deliver consistent and equitable care informed by genomics, while providing data to inform academic and industry research and development. In parallel, a large scale research study, Our Future Health, has UK Government and Industry investment and aims to recruit 5 million volunteers to support research intended to improve early detection, risk stratification, and early intervention for chronic diseases. To explore how current models of genomic health data generation intersect, and to understand clinical, ethical, legal, policy and social issues arising from this intersection, we conducted a series of five multidisciplinary panel discussions attended by 28 invited stakeholders. Meetings were recorded and transcribed. We present a summary of issues identified: genomic test attributes; reasons for generating genomic health data; individuals' motivation to seek genomic data; health service impacts; role of genetic counseling; equity; data uses and security; consent; governance and regulation. We conclude with some suggestions for policy consideration.

Pharmacogenomics in Pain Management: A Review of Relevant Gene-Drug Associations and Clinical Considerations

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of clinical recommendations regarding genomic medicine relating to pain management and opioid use disorder.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review was conducted using the search terms pain management, pharmacogenomics, pharmacogenetics, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and opioids on PubMed (inception to February 1, 2021), CINAHL (2016 through February 1, 2021), and EMBASE (inception through February 1, 2021).

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All relevant clinical trials, review articles, package inserts, and guidelines evaluating applicable pharmacogenotypes were considered for inclusion.

DATA SYNTHESIS

More than 300 Food and Drug Administration-approved medications contain pharmacogenomic information in their labeling. Genetic variability may alter the therapeutic effects of commonly prescribed pain medications. Pharmacogenomic-guided therapy continues to gain traction in clinical practice, but a multitude of barriers to widespread pharmacogenomic implementation exist.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Pain is notoriously difficult to treat given the need to balance safety and efficacy when selecting pharmacotherapy. Pharmacogenomic data can help optimize outcomes for patients with pain. With improved technological advances, more affordable testing, and a better understanding of genomic variants resulting in treatment disparities, pharmacogenomics continues to gain popularity. Unfortunately, despite these and other advancements, pharmacogenomic testing and implementation remain underutilized and misunderstood in clinical care, in part because of a lack of health care professionals trained in assessing and implementing test results.

CONCLUSIONS

A one-size-fits-all approach to pain management is inadequate and outdated. With increasing genomic data and pharmacogenomic understanding, patient-specific genomic testing offers a comprehensive and personalized treatment alternative worthy of additional research and consideration.

Information Provided to Consumers about Direct-to-Consumer Nutrigenetic Testing

BACKGROUND

Nutrigenetic tests are often considered to be less serious compared to other health-related genetic tests, although they share similar ethical concerns. Nutrigenetic tests are mainly available through direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC GT) and increasing in popularity.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the contents of nutrigenetic DTC GT websites with respect to the adequacy of the information provided to support a well-informed decision of purchasing the tests.

METHODS

The websites of DTC GT companies selling nutrigenetic tests that could be ordered online without involving any healthcare professional, available in English, marketing tests in Europe, the USA, Australia, or Canada, and accessible from Finland were included in the study (n = 38). Quantitative and qualitative content analyses of the websites were carried out with the help of a codebook.

RESULTS

Of the 38 websites, 8 included a clearly identifiable and easy-to-find information section about genetics. The quality and contents of these sections were often insufficient and/or misleading. Fourteen websites had specific sections discussing the risks related to GT, and on 13 signed informed consent was requested for GT. Furthermore, only 2 of the companies offered any kind of pretest consultation and 13 offered mostly separately charged posttest consultation. The complex structure of the websites made it difficult to find all key information, with many important aspects buried in legal documents, which were challenging to comprehend even for a professional.

CONCLUSION

The structure of the websites and the amount and quality of the content therein do not support a well-informed decision.

Legislation of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in Europe: a fragmented regulatory landscape

Despite the increasing availability of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, it is currently unclear how such services are regulated in Europe, due to the lack of EU or national legislation specifically addressing this issue. In this article, we provide an overview of laws that could potentially impact the regulation of DTC genetic testing in 26 European countries, namely Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Emphasis is placed on provisions relating to medical supervision, genetic counselling and informed consent. Our results indicate that currently there is a wide spectrum of laws regarding genetic testing in Europe. There are countries (e.g. France and Germany) which essentially ban DTC genetic testing, while in others (e.g. Luxembourg and Poland) DTC genetic testing may only be restricted by general laws, usually regarding health care services and patients' rights.

Transparency of genetic testing services for 'health, wellness and lifestyle': analysis of online prepurchase information for UK consumers

The declining cost of DNA sequencing has been accompanied by a proliferation of companies selling 'direct-to-consumer genetic testing' (DTC-GT) services. Many of these are marketed online as tools for enabling citizens to make more informed decisions about their health, wellness and lifestyle. We assessed the 'information for consumers' provided by these companies at the prepurchase stage, which could influence initial decisions to part with money, data or tissue samples. A scoping exercise revealed 65 DTC-GT companies advertising their services online to consumers in the United Kingdom, of which 15 met our inclusion criteria. We benchmarked their consumer information against the good practice principles developed by the UK Human Genetics Commission (HGC). No provider complied with all the HGC principles and overall levels of compliance varied considerably. Although consent for testing was discussed by all but one company, information about data reuse for research or other purposes was often sparse and consent options limited or unclear. Most did not provide supplementary support services to help users better understand or cope with the implications of test results. We provide recommendations for updating the preconsumer transparency aspects of the HGC guidelines to ensure their fitness-for-purpose in this rapidly changing market. We also recommend improving coordination between relevant governance bodies to ensure minimum standards of transparency, quality and accountability. Although DTC-GT has many potential benefits, close partnership between consumers, industry and government, along with interdisciplinary science input, are essential to ensure that these innovations are used ethically and responsibly.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a systematic review of european guidelines, recommendations, and position statements

BACKGROUND

Personalized healthcare is expected to yield promising results, with a paradigm shift toward more personalization in the practice of medicine. This emerging field has wide-ranging implications for all the stakeholders. Commercial tests in the form of multiplex genetic profiles are currently being provided to consumers, without the physicians' consultation, through the Internet, referred to as direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC GT).

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to review all the existing European guidelines on DTC GT, and its associated interventions, to list all the supposed benefits and harms, issues and concerns, and recommendations.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of position statements, policies, guidelines, and recommendations, produced by professional organizations or other relevant bodies for use of DTC GT in Europe.

RESULTS

Seventeen documents met the inclusion criteria, which were subjected to thematic analysis, and the texts were coded for statements related to use of DTC GT.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Professional societies and associations are currently more suggestive of potential disadvantages of DTC GT, recommending improved genetic literacy of both populations and health professionals, and implementation research on the genetic tests to integrate public health genomics into healthcare systems.

Direct-to-consumer genomics on the scales of autonomy

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic services have generated enormous controversy from their first emergence. A dramatic recent manifestation of this is the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) cease and desist order against 23andMe, the leading provider in the market. Critics have argued for the restrictive regulation of such services, and even their prohibition, on the grounds of the harm they pose to consumers. Their advocates, by contrast, defend them as a means of enhancing the autonomy of those same consumers. Autonomy emerges as a key battle-field in this debate, because many of the 'harm' arguments can be interpreted as identifying threats to autonomy. This paper assesses whether DTC genomic services are a threat to, or instead, an enhancement of, personal autonomy. It deploys Joseph Raz's account of personal autonomy, with its emphasis on choice from a range of valuable options. It then seeks to counter claims that DTC genomics threatens autonomy because it involves manipulation in contravention of consumers' independence or because it does not generate valuable options which can be meaningfully engaged with by consumers. It is stressed that the value of the options generated by DTC genomics should not be judged exclusively from the perspective of medical actionability, but should take into consideration plural utilities. Finally, the paper ends by broaching policy recommendations, suggesting that there is a strong autonomy-based argument for permitting DTC genomic services, and that the key question is the nature of the regulatory conditions under which they should be permitted. The discussion of autonomy in this paper helps illuminate some of these conditions.

Issues concerning the evaluation and regulation of predictive genetic testing

This paper is a précis of my keynote address at the Symposium on Predictive Genetic Testing organised by the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin. The talk is based on reflections which I have had over a number of years on genetic testing and its evaluation and regulation. It presents a thesis, which I hope will generate discussion and comment. A theme which will run through the paper is the need for precise definition of terms before making any normative statement about such terms. Our failure to do so in genetic discourse is at best confusing and at worst capable of resulting in inappropriate (and sometimes harmful) regulatory responses.

The perspective from EASAC and FEAM on direct-to-consumer genetic testing for health-related purposes

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing services raise scientific, regulatory and ethical questions. A report was prepared by consultation with an expert Working Group and published by the academies of science (European Academies of Science Advisory Council, EASAC) and medicine (Federation of European Academies of Medicine, FEAM). This report reviews current scientific evidence, ascertains the principles that should underpin the options for action by policy-makers, and discusses the potential for devising proportionate and flexible regulation that enables future innovation, taking account of the work of other expert groups, most notably the European Society of Human Genetics. EASAC-FEAM concluded that DTC genetic testing has little clinical value at present, and expresses especial caution in several specific respects, for example relating to testing for high penetrance, serious disorders, prenatal screening, nutrigenomic and pharmacogenetic testing. It was emphasised that regulation must be on the basis that claims about the link between genetic marker and disease are scientifically valid. Other key issues to address include quality assurance (that includes the professional interpretation of results), transparent supply of accurate information, consideration of the implications for established health services, and clarification of consent procedures for any use of data for research purposes. There are important implications: for the European Commission, in revising the Directive on In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices; for professional bodies, in supporting training and guideline development; for the broader research community, in generating the evidence base; and for the public health community, in improving the routine translation of research advances into clinical practice.

Genetic data and electronic health records: a discussion of ethical, logistical and technological considerations

Objective

The completion of sequencing the human genome in 2003 has spurred the production and collection of genetic data at ever increasing rates. Genetic data obtained for clinical purposes, as is true for all results of clinical tests, are expected to be included in patients’ medical records. With this explosion of information, questions of what, when, where and how to incorporate genetic data into electronic health records (EHRs) have reached a critical point. In order to answer these questions fully, this paper addresses the ethical, logistical and technological issues involved in incorporating these data into EHRs.

Materials and methods

This paper reviews journal articles, government documents and websites relevant to the ethics, genetics and informatics domains as they pertain to EHRs.

Results and discussion

The authors explore concerns and tasks facing health information technology (HIT) developers at the intersection of ethics, genetics, and technology as applied to EHR development.

Conclusions

By ensuring the efficient and effective incorporation of genetic data into EHRs, HIT developers will play a key role in facilitating the delivery of personalized medicine.

Survey of European clinical geneticists on awareness, experiences and attitudes towards direct-to-consumer genetic testing

BACKGROUND

The advent of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing (GT) has sparked a number of debates regarding the scientific validity of tests, their broad health and ethical implications for society as well as their legal status. To date, relatively few empirical studies have been published regarding this phenomenon. We conducted a survey of European clinical geneticists to gauge their awareness of, experiences with, and attitudes towards DTC GT.

METHODS

We invited 300 clinical geneticists from 28 European countries to complete an online questionnaire. Statistical analyses of closed-ended questions were performed using the STATISTICA software package. Answers to open-ended questions were analysed for recurring themes.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-one clinical geneticists answered our survey (response rate, 44%). Eighty-six percent (110/128) of respondents were aware of DTC GT, and over one-third had been contacted by at least one patient regarding these services. The majority (84%) of respondents did not agree with telephone medical supervision outside of an established doctor-patient relationship. The majority of clinical geneticists also found it unacceptable to provide non-face-to-face medical supervision for: (i) a presymptomatic test for a condition with very high penetrance; (ii) a predictive test for a condition that has a 'medium' penetrance of 50% to 60%; and (iii) carrier testing. For conditions that are neither treatable nor preventable and for disorders with serious health consequences, clinical geneticists were almost unanimous in expressing the unacceptability of offering such genetic tests outside of the traditional healthcare setting, without an established physician-patient relationship and without face-to-face medical supervision.

CONCLUSION

A high percentage of European clinical geneticists are aware of DTC GT and the majority do not agree with the model of provision used by many commercial companies for certain severe or actionable health conditions. Despite this disagreement with the DTC model of provision, >85% of respondents said that they would offer genetic counselling to patients who asked for a consultation after having undergone DTC genetic testing. The understanding of the views and opinions of this expert stakeholder group should be considered in the attempts to shape responsible policy and guidelines for these services.

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.

Field of genes: an investigation of sports-related genetic testing

Sports-related genetic testing is a sector of the diverse direct-to-consumer (DTC) industry that has not yet been examined thoroughly by academic scholars. A systematic search was used to identify companies in this sector and content analysis of online information was performed. More than a dozen companies were identified. Marketing practices observed generally did not target parents for child testing, and marketing images were mild compared to images used in popular media. Information was provided at a high reading level (industry-wide Flesh-Kincaid Grade Levels > 11). While ~75% of companies provide privacy policies and terms of service prior to purchase and ~40% provide scientific citations for their tests, <25% reported using American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) accredited or the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) certified laboratories. Tests ranged considerably in price (~$100–$1,100) and were substantively diverse. These findings highlight the need to appreciate nuances and avoid broad generalizations of this and other DTC sectors. Utilization of consumer protections available for e-commerce generally may adequately protect DTC genetics consumers without new federal legislation or regulation.

Genetic testing in renal disease

A revolution is happening in genetics! The decoding of the first genome in 2003 was a large international collaborative effort that took about 13 years at a cost of around $2.7 billion. Now, only a few years later, new technology allows the sequencing of an entire genome within a few weeks--and at a cost of less than $10,000. The vaunted $1000 genome is within reach. These extraordinary advances will undoubtedly transform the way we practice medicine. But, like any new technology, it carries risks, as well as benefits. As physicians, we need to understand the implications in order to best utilise these advances for our patients and to provide informed advice. In this review, our aim is to explain these new technologies, to separate the hype from the reality and to address some of the resulting questions and implications. The practical objective is to provide a simple overview of the available technologies and of purpose to which they are best suited.

Direct to consumer genetic testing: a systematic review of position statements, policies and recommendations

In healthcare settings, genetic tests to determine whether an individual had inherited a genetic mutation are ordered by a health professional, and the results are interpreted and conveyed to the patient by that person. However, direct to consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) has enabled individuals to purchase genetic tests and receive results without the intervention of a health professional. To inform a set of guidelines for consumers and health professionals, we undertook a systematic review of position statements, policies and recommendations on the use of DTCGT. We performed a search of seven databases and the Internet for relevant documents. The search terms were 'direct to consumer' and 'genetic test', and documents in English published from 2002 to 2011 were included. The search retrieved 314 items, of which 14 were eligible for review. Five themes were derived from thematic analysis: motivation for use, potential benefits, potential harms, recommendations to guide consumers and need for research. The authors of these documents described more potential harms than benefits, but, although some stated that direct to consumer testing should be actively discouraged, others supported consumer rights to make autonomous choices. Further research into the impact of direct to consumer testing on health services and consumers is required to inform policies.

The impact of genomics on public health practice: the case for change

Public health practice will not be able in the 21st century to ignore the impact of genomics, cell and molecular biology. It will need to take into consideration issues that include, among others: the complementary nature of social and biological models of disease, genetic exceptionalism, the readiness of public and patient to respond to genomic information, the relationship between individuals and populations, and concepts of population stratification. Health systems will need to adapt their practice and organisation to include new sequencing technologies, bioinformatic expertise and proper evaluation of genetic and molecular tests. Links with the commercial sector will increase in importance. The impact on developing countries cannot be ignored and will require special attention.

Communication about DTC testing: commentary on a 'family experience of personal genomics'

This paper provides a commentary on 'Family Experience of Personal Genomics' (Corpas 2012). An overview is offered on the communication literature available to help support individuals and families to communicate about genetic information. Despite there being a wealth of evidence, built on years of genetic counseling practice, this does not appear to have been translated clearly to the Direct to Consumer (DTC) testing market. In many countries it is possible to order a DTC genetic test without the involvement of any health professional; there has been heated debate about whether this is appropriate or not. Much of the focus surrounding this has been on whether it is necessary to have a health professional available to offer their clinical knowledge and help with interpreting the DTC genetic test data. What has been missed from this debate is the importance of enabling customers of DTC testing services access to the abundance of information about how to communicate their genetic risks to others, including immediate family. Family communication about health and indeed genetics can be fraught with difficulty. Genetic health professionals, specifically genetic counselors, have particular expertise in family communication about genetics. Such information could be incredibly useful to kinships as they grapple with knowing how to communicate their genomic information with relatives.

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.

Direct-to-consumer personalized genomic testing

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

Individualized cost-effectiveness analysis

John Ioannidis and Alan Garber discuss how to use incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and related metrics so they can be useful for decision-making at the individual level, whether used by clinicians or individual patients.