Using Alzheimer's disease as a model for genetic risk disclosure: implications for personal genomics

Health care utilization and behavior changes after workplace genetic testing at a large US health care system

PURPOSE

This study explored employee health behavior changes and health care utilization after workplace genetic testing (wGT). Wellness-program-associated wGT seeks to improve employee health, but the related health implications are unknown.

METHODS

Employees of a large US health care system offering wGT (cancer, heart disease, and pharmacogenomics [PGx]) were sent electronic surveys. Self-reported data from those who received test results were analyzed. Descriptive statistics characterized responses, whereas logistic regression analyses explored correlates of responses to wGT.

RESULTS

53.9% (n = 418/776) of respondents (88.3% female, mean age = 44 years) reported receiving wGT results. 12.0% (n = 48/399) received results indicating increased risk (IR) of cancer, 9.5% (n = 38/398) had IR of heart disease, and 31.4% (n = 125/398) received informative PGx results. IR results for cancer and/or heart disease (n = 67) were associated with health behavior changes (adjusted odds ratio: 3.23; 95% CI 1.75, 6.13; P < .001) and health care utilization (adjusted odds ratio: 8.60; 95% CI 4.43, 17.5; P < .001). Informative PGx results (n = 125) were associated with medication changes (PGx-informative: 15.2%; PGx-uninformative: 4.8%; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

This study explored employee responses to wGT, contributing to the understanding of the ethical and social implications of wGT. Receiving IR results from wGT may promote health behavior changes and health care utilization in employees.

Ethical Considerations for Identifying Individuals in the Prodromal/Early Phase of Parkinson's Disease: A Narrative Review

The ability to identify individuals in the prodromal phase of Parkinson's disease has improved in recent years, raising the question of whether and how those affected should be informed about the risk of future disease. Several studies investigated prognostic counselling for individuals with isolated REM sleep behavior disorder and have shown that most patients want to receive information about prognosis, but autonomy and individual preferences must be respected. However, there are still many unanswered questions about risk disclosure or early diagnosis of PD, including the impact on personal circumstances, cultural preferences and specific challenges associated with different profiles of prodromal symptoms, genetic testing or biomarker assessments. This narrative review aims to summarize the current literature on prognostic counselling and risk disclosure in PD, as well as highlight future perspectives that may emerge with the development of new biomarkers and their anticipated impact on the definition of PD.

Interest in genetic susceptibility testing and disclosure of AD dementia risk in cognitively normal adults: a survey study

BACKGROUND

Apolipoprotein-E (APOE) genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease is becoming more important as clinical trials are increasingly targeting individuals carrying APOE-ε4 alleles. Little is known about the interest in finding out one's genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease in the general population. Our objective was to examine this in a sample of cognitively normal (CN) adults within a population-based online research registry with the goal to implement APOE-ε4 status for trial recruitment.

METHODS

An online survey was completed by 442 CN participants between the age of 49 and 75 years (56% female) from the Dutch Brain Research Registry. The survey assessed interest in participation in research into, and disclosure of, genetic risk for dementia. The survey assessed interest in participation in research into, and disclosure of, genetic risk for dementia and knowing their genetic risk in different hypothetical risk scenarios (10%, 30%, and 50% genetic risk for dementia at age 85, corresponding to APOEε2/ε2 or ε2/ε3, APOEε3/ε4 or ε2ε4, and APOE-ε4/ε4 genotypes). Cochran's Q and post hoc McNemar tests were used to analyse differences in frequencies across scenarios.

RESULTS

Most participants were interested in participating in research into and disclosure of their genetic risk (81%). The most reported reason was to contribute to scientific research (94%). Interest was higher in males, whilst lower-educated participants were more often undecided. When provided with different risk scenarios, interest in knowing their risk was somewhat higher in the scenarios with higher risk, i.e. in the 50% (79%) compared to the 10% scenario (73%;χ2(2) = 7.98; p = .005). Most individuals expected they would share their genetic risk with close relatives (77-89%), would participate in medication trials (79-88%), and would make long-term arrangements, e.g. retirement, health care, will (69-82%), with larger proportions for scenarios with higher hypothetical genetic risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the vast majority of CN adults participating in a research registry expresses interest in AD genetic risk research and disclosure. Interest in genetic risk disclosure is higher in scenarios corresponding to the APOE-ε4 genotype. This suggests APOE-ε4 screening within an online research registry is potentially a well-received method to accelerate inclusion for trials.

"And Does That Necessarily Mean Absolutely Alzheimer's?" An Analysis of Questions Raised Following Amyloid PET Results Disclosure

INTRODUCTION

Amyloid PET scans provide individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) information about their risk of progressing to Alzheimer's dementia (AD). Given the wide-ranging implications of this information, best practice guidelines are needed to support researchers and clinicians disclosing these high-stakes test results. To inform the development of such guidelines, this analysis aims to describe questions and concerns raised during the disclosure of amyloid PET results in the context of MCI.

METHODS

Qualitative description was performed to analyze (n = 34) transcripts of audio-recorded amyloid PET results disclosure sessions involving MCI care dyads. The analysis focused on characterizing the frequency and nature of questions raised during an open question-and-answer (Q&A) period following the return of scan results using a standardized protocol.

RESULTS

Nearly all (n = 32/34) dyads posed questions during Q&A. Questions fell within six main categories with the most common being requests for clarification regarding AD/MCI, and next steps given the result. Questions were interspersed with comments reflecting the need for emotional support. Independently administered assessments of comprehension of results showed that, following the disclosure and Q&A, 31/32 participants with MCI and 31/31 care partners scored ≥4 on a 5-point scale. The number of questions asked by care partners during Q&A positively correlated with their level of comprehension (n = 31, Spearman's r = 0.370, p = 0.040).

DISCUSSION

This analysis highlights the value of providing opportunities for patients and their family members to ask questions upon learning patients' brain amyloid status. Disclosing clinicians should be prepared to provide clarification, resources, and support to patients and families during the return of amyloid PET results.

Return of Results in Genomic Research Using Large-Scale or Whole Genome Sequencing: Toward a New Normal

Genome sequencing is increasingly used in research and integrated into clinical care. In the research domain, large-scale analyses, including whole genome sequencing with variant interpretation and curation, virtually guarantee identification of variants that are pathogenic or likely pathogenic and actionable. Multiple guidelines recommend that findings associated with actionable conditions be offered to research participants in order to demonstrate respect for autonomy, reciprocity, and participant interests in health and privacy. Some recommendations go further and support offering a wider range of findings, including those that are not immediately actionable. In addition, entities covered by the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) may be required to provide a participant's raw genomic data on request. Despite these widely endorsed guidelines and requirements, the implementation of return of genomic results and data by researchers remains uneven. This article analyzes the ethical and legal foundations for researcher duties to offer adult participants their interpreted results and raw data as the new normal in genomic research.

Safety and Tolerability of APOE Genotyping and Disclosure in Cognitively Normal Volunteers From the Butler Alzheimer's Prevention Registry

AIMS

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a gradually progressive neurodegenerative disease that ultimately results in total loss of cognitive and functional independence in older adults. This study aimed to examine the safety and tolerability of APOE disclosure in community-dwelling, cognitively normal (CN) older adults from the Butler Alzheimer's Prevention Registry (BAPR), and to determine whether APOE disclosure impacted participant's decisions to participate in AD clinical research.

METHODS

186 (N = 106 ∊4 non-carriers, 80 ∊4 carriers) CN older adults aged 58-78 from the BAPR completed 2 visits: one for psychological readiness screening and genotyping and one for APOE disclosure. Online follow-ups were completed 3 days, 6 weeks, and 6 months post-disclosure. Primary outcomes were scores on self-report measures of depression, anxiety, impact of events, and perceived risk of AD, along with enrollment in AD clinical trials.

RESULTS

∊4 carriers and non-carriers did not differ significantly on measures of depression, anxiety, or suicidal ideation over the 6-month follow-up period. ∊4 carriers reported higher impact of disclosure than non-carriers immediately after disclosure, but both groups' scores on impact of events measures remained sub-clinical. ∊4 carriers and non-carriers were equally likely to participate in AD research after disclosure, with genotype-dependent differences in type of clinical trial enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

APOE genotyping and disclosure was safe and well tolerated in a group of CN, community-dwelling older adults, who were pre-screened after volunteering for AD research through BAPR. Implications for the inclusion of APOE genotyping and disclosure at AD clinical trial sites are discussed.

Considerations regarding a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease before dementia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The NIA-AA research framework proposes a purely biological definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD). This implies that AD can be diagnosed based on biomarker abnormalities, irrespective of clinical manifestation. While this brings opportunities, it also raises challenges. We aimed to provide an overview of considerations regarding the disclosure of AD pathology before the onset of dementia.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection (on 10 December 2020) for references on conveying AD biomarker results to individuals without dementia. Our query combined variations on the terms Alzheimer's disease, disclosure, or diagnosis, preclinical or prodromal, and biomarkers. Two reviewers independently screened the resulting 6860 titles and abstracts for eligibility and examined 162 full-text records for relevance. We included theoretical articles in English, on communicating amyloid and/or tau results to individuals with mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive decline, or normal cognition. MAXQDA-software was used for inductive data analysis.

RESULTS

We included 27 publications. From these, we extracted 26 unique considerations, which we grouped according to their primary relevance to a clinical, personal, or societal context. Clinical considerations included (lack of) validity, utility, and disclosure protocols. Personal considerations covered psychological and behavioral implications, as well as the right to (not) know. Finally, societal considerations comprised the risk of misconception, stigmatization, and discrimination. Overall, views were heterogeneous and often contradictory, with emphasis on harmful effects.

CONCLUSIONS

We found 26 diverse and opposing considerations, related to a clinical, personal, or societal context, which are relevant to diagnosing AD before dementia. The theoretical literature tended to focus on adverse impact and rely on common morality, while the motivation for and implications of biomarker testing are deeply personal. Our findings provide a starting point for clinicians to discuss biomarker-based diagnosis with their patients, which will become even more relevant in light of the conditional approval of a first disease-modifying drug for AD.

Spillover: The Approval of New Medications for Alzheimer's Disease Dementia Will Impact Biomarker Disclosure Among Asymptomatic Research Participants

In this article we address how the recent, and anticipated upcoming, FDA approvals of novel anti-amyloid medications to treat individuals with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia could impact disclosure of biomarker results among asymptomatic research participants. Currently, research is typically the context where an asymptomatic individual may have the option to learn their amyloid biomarker status. Asymptomatic research participants who learn their amyloid status may have questions regarding the meaning of this result and the implications for accessing a potential intervention. After outlining our rationale, we provide examples of how current educational materials used in research convey messages regarding amyloid positivity and the availability of treatments, or lack thereof. We suggest language to improve messaging, as well as strengths of current materials, in addressing these issues for research participants. Although novel medications are currently only approved for use among symptomatic individuals, their availability may have implications for disclosure among asymptomatic research participants with evidence of amyloid deposition, who may be especially interested in information on these interventions for potential prevention, or future treatment, of mild cognitive impairment or dementia due to AD.

Ethics of Early Intervention in Alzheimer's Disease

Alzheimer's disease (AD) research, treatment, and prevention focus increasingly on developing personalized interventions based on personal genetic, biological, phenotypic data, for early intervention (EI) to limit harm. This approach has much to recommend it, but important ethical and philosophical challenges follow that should be considered, which we analyze here. We argue that advancing understanding of the causes of AD undermines the clarity of the distinction between primary and secondary prevention. This makes it increasingly unclear how primary and secondary categories can be appealed to as the basis for making judgements about what interventions are permissible, and for distinguishing between acceptably vs unacceptably early points in life to intervene. Timely efforts at prevention are vital for limiting harm from AD and given the logic of EI is that, in presence of risk, earlier is better, one might assume that earliest is best. This may or may not be the case; however, the permissibility of intervening in different ways at different stages of life is complex and turns on numerous contextual factors. We consider the particular ethical implications of intervening at different points in the life course, presenting a valuable resource for negotiating clinical and policy implications of EI in AD.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Genetic Sample Provision Among National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Participants

BACKGROUND

Genetic data help detect preclinical Alzheimer's disease and target individuals for clinical trials, making genetic research engagement critical for continued advancement in dementia prevention and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To understand what individual and institutional factors may relate to provision of genetic samples within the Alzheimer's Disease Centers.

METHODS

Data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (2009-2016) were obtained along with genetic sample availability. Logistic regression was used to assess independent contributions of demographic and clinical characteristics to the probability of sample provision. Sites contributing data completed a brief survey exploring regulatory and scientific issues related to genetic research engagement.

RESULTS

Just over half (52.1%) of the 27,519 unique participants had genetic data available. Female sex, white race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, normal cognition, and greater than 5 years of follow-up were associated with greater probability of availability. Sites identified refusals as the most frequent barrier to sample provision, followed by staff availability.

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the importance of strategies to promote minority engagement and encourage earlier genetic research participation.

Discouraging Elective Genetic Testing of Minors: A Norm under Siege in a New Era of Genomic Medicine

Consistently, the field of genetic counseling has advocated that parents be advised to defer elective genetic testing of minors until adulthood to prevent a range of potential harms, including stigma, discrimination, and the loss of the child's ability to decide for him- or herself as an adult. However, consensus around the policy of "defer-when-possible" obscures the extent to which this norm is currently under siege. Increasingly, routine use of full or partial genome sequencing challenges our ability to control what is discovered in childhood or, when applied in a prenatal context, even before birth. The expansion of consumer-initiated genetic testing services challenges our ability to restrict what is available to minors. As the barriers to access crumble, medical professionals should proceed with caution, bearing in mind potential risks and continuing to assess the impact of genetic testing on this vulnerable population.

Disclosing genetic risk for Alzheimer's dementia to individuals with mild cognitive impairment

INTRODUCTION

The safety of predicting conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia using apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping is unknown.

METHODS

We randomized 114 individuals with MCI to receive estimates of 3-year risk of conversion to AD dementia informed by APOE genotyping (disclosure arm) or not (non-disclosure arm) in a non-inferiority clinical trial. Primary outcomes were anxiety and depression scores. Secondary outcomes included other psychological measures.

RESULTS

Upper confidence limits for randomization arm differences were 2.3 on the State Trait Anxiety Index and 0.5 on the Geriatric Depression Scale, below non-inferiority margins of 3.3 and 1.0. Moreover, mean scores were lower in the disclosure arm than non-disclosure arm for test-related positive impact (difference: -1.9, indicating more positive feelings) and AD concern (difference: -0.3).

DISCUSSION

Providing genetic information to individuals with MCI about imminent risk for AD does not increase risks of anxiety or depression and may provide psychological benefits.

Ethical issues in susceptibility genetic testing for late-onset neurodegenerative diseases

Genome-wide association studies have revolutionized our understanding of the genetic architecture of complex traits and diseases over the last decade. This knowledge is enabling clinicians, researchers, and direct-to-consumer genetics companies to conduct disease susceptibility testing based on powerful methods such as polygenic risk scoring. However, these technologies raise a set of complex ethical, legal, social, and policy considerations. Here we review and discuss a series of ethical dilemmas associated with susceptibility genetic testing for the two most common late-onset neurodegenerative diseases, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, including testing in asymptomatic individuals. Among others, these include informed consent, disclosure of results and unexpected findings, mandatory screening, privacy and confidentiality, and stigma and genetic discrimination. Importantly, appropriate counseling is a deciding factor for the ethical soundness of genetic testing, which poses a challenge for the regulation of these tests and the training of healthcare professionals. As genetic knowledge about these diseases continues growing and genetic testing becomes more widespread, it is increasingly important to raise awareness among researchers, medical practitioners, genetic counselors, and decision makers about the ethical, legal, and social issues associated with genetic testing for polygenic diseases.

Who should access germline genome sequencing? A mixed methods study of patient views

Implementation of any new medical test, including germline genome sequencing (GS) to inform cancer risk, should take place only when a test is effective, ethically justifiable and acceptable to a population. Little empirical evidence exists on patient views regarding GS for cancer risk. The aim of this study was to elicit opinions on who should be offered GS and who should pay for it. Participants with a probable genetic basis for their cancer (n = 335) and blood relatives (n = 199) were recruited to undergo GS and invited to complete questionnaires at baseline. A subset (n = 40) also participated in qualitative interviews about their views regarding access to GS to detect cancer risk. Our response rate was 92% for questionnaires and 100% for interviews. Participants expressed high enthusiasm overall for access to GS for those with a family history of cancer and anyone who requested testing, but enthusiasm was lower for universal access, if opting out was possible and finances not an issue. Rationales for these views reflected maximising the sound use of resources. Challenges to introducing community screening via GS to limit cancer burden were raised, including the current limits of science and individual ability to cope with uncertain results. Participants undergoing GS supported cancer risk testing for those with a family history of cancer but were concerned about the challenges of designing and implementing a population-based GS cancer-screening program.

Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Generation Program: Development of an APOE genetic counseling and disclosure process in the context of clinical trials

Introduction

As the number of Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention studies grows, many individuals will need to learn their genetic and/or biomarker risk for the disease to determine trial eligibility. An alternative to traditional models of genetic counseling and disclosure is needed to provide comprehensive standardized counseling and disclosure of apolipoprotein E (APOE) results efficiently, safely, and effectively in the context of AD prevention trials.

Methods

A multidisciplinary Genetic Testing, Counseling, and Disclosure Committee was established and charged with operationalizing the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative (API) Genetic Counseling and Disclosure Process for use in the API Generation Program trials. The objective was to provide consistent information to research participants before and during the APOE counseling and disclosure session using standardized educational and session materials.

Results

The Genetic Testing, Counseling, and Disclosure Committee created a process consisting of eight components: requirements of APOE testing and reports, psychological readiness assessment, determination of AD risk estimates, guidance for identifying providers of disclosure, predisclosure education, APOE counseling and disclosure session materials, APOE counseling and disclosure session flow, and assessing APOE disclosure impact.

Discussion

The API Genetic Counseling and Disclosure Process provides a framework for large-scale disclosure of APOE genotype results to study participants and serves as a model for disclosure of biomarker results. The process provides education to participants about the meaning and implication(s) of their APOE results while also incorporating a comprehensive assessment of disclosure impact. Data assessing participant safety and psychological well-being before and after APOE disclosure are still being collected and will be presented in a future publication.

•

Participants may need to learn their risk for Alzheimer's disease to enroll in studies.

•

Alternatives to traditional models of apolipoprotein E counseling and disclosure are needed.

•

An alternative process was developed by the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative.

•

This process has been implemented by the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Generation Program.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Assessing the Psychological Impact of Genetic Susceptibility Testing

The expanded use of genetic testing raises key ethical and policy questions about possible benefits and harms for those receiving disease-risk information. As predictive testing for Huntington's was initiated in a clinical setting, survey research posing hypothetical test scenarios suggested that the vast majority of at-risk relatives wanted to know whether they carried a disease-causing mutation. However, only a small minority ultimately availed themselves of this opportunity. Many at-risk individuals concluded that a positive test result would be too psychologically overwhelming. A substantial literature suggests that individuals are often more resilient than anticipated in coping with many different health-related stresses. Much of my own work in the field has been through the Risk Evaluation & Education for Alzheimer's Disease study (REVEAL), a series of randomized clinical trials assessing the impact of genetic susceptibility testing on asymptomatic individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease. Our experience in developing and implementing four successive, multisite trials provides some potentially useful lessons for the field. More people will be asking for their personal genetic information. Better understanding will help us decide when access is appropriate and how best to disclose results in a manner that supports adjustment to test findings and promotes use of genetic information to improve human health.

GeneMatch: A novel recruitment registry using at-home APOE genotyping to enhance referrals to Alzheimer's prevention studies

INTRODUCTION

Recruitment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention research studies is challenging because of lack of awareness among cognitively healthy adults coupled with the high screen fail rate due to participants not having a genetic risk factor or biomarker evidence of the disease. Participant recruitment registries offer one solution for efficiently and effectively identifying, characterizing, and connecting potential eligible volunteers to studies.

METHODS

Individuals aged 55-75 years who live in the United States and self-report not having a diagnosis of cognitive impairment such as MCI or dementia are eligible to join GeneMatch. Participants enroll online and are provided a cheek swab kit for DNA extraction and apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping. Participants are not told their APOE results, although the results may be used in part to help match participants to AD prevention studies.

RESULTS

As of August 2018, 75,351 participants had joined GeneMatch. Nearly 30% of participants have one APOE4 allele, and approximately 3% have two APOE4 alleles. The percentages of APOE4 heterozygotes and homozygotes are inversely associated with age (P < .001).

DISCUSSION

GeneMatch, the first trial-independent research enrollment program designed to recruit and refer cognitively healthy adults to AD prevention studies based in part on APOE test results, provides a novel mechanism to accelerate prescreening and enrollment for AD prevention trials.

On the personal utility of Alzheimer's disease-related biomarker testing in the research context

Many healthy volunteers choose to take part in Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention studies because they want to know whether they will develop dementia-and what they can do to reduce their risk-and are therefore interested in learning the results of AD biomarker tests. Proponents of AD biomarker disclosure often refer to the personal utility of AD biomarkers, claiming that research participants will be able to use AD biomarker information for personal purposes, such as planning ahead or making important life decisions. In this paper, the claim that AD biomarkers have personal utility for asymptomatic individuals is critically assessed. It demonstrates that in the absence of clinical validity, AD biomarkers cannot have personal utility and do not serve research participants' autonomy. Over the next few years, many research groups will be confronted with participants' preferences to learn the results of AD biomarker tests. When researchers choose to make results available upon explicit request, they should ensure adequate information provision and education, notably on the uncertain clinical significance of AD biomarker information. Routine disclosure of AD biomarkers to cognitively unimpaired individuals in research settings cannot be justified with an appeal to the personal utility of AD biomarker information.

African American Living Donors' Attitudes About APOL1 Genetic Testing: A Mixed Methods Study

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

African American live kidney donors ("donors") have a greater risk for kidney failure than European American donors. Apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1) variants in African Americans may be associated with this disparity.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional mixed-methods design.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

African American donors at 1 transplantation center.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Semistructured interviews assessed attitudes about APOL1 genetic testing, willingness to undergo APOL1 testing, hypothetical decisions about donating with 2 APOL1 variants, and demographics. Surveys assessed perceptions of ethnic identity and genetics knowledge. Interview transcriptions were analyzed using thematic analysis. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

23 donors participated in semistructured interviews. Most (96%) reported that transplantation centers should routinely offer APOL1 genetic testing to all African American potential donors. Most (87%) would have been willing to undergo APOL1 testing before donating. Although study participants noted that APOL1 testing may deter African American potential donors from donating, most (61%) would have donated even if they had 2 high-risk APOL1 variants. Several themes emerged. Study participants believed that APOL1 testing was beneficial for providing information to help donors make informed donation decisions. Participants expressed concern about APOL1 variants placing donors at harm for kidney failure, and therefore valued taking preventive health measures. Participants believed that potential donors would experience psychological distress from learning that they have 2 gene variants and could harm their recipients. Participants were apprehensive about insurance coverage and costs of APOL1 testing and feared that APOL1 genetic test results could discriminate against African Americans.

LIMITATIONS

Findings may not be generalizable to African American potential donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that African American donors support APOL1 genetic testing yet fear that APOL1 variants and genetic testing could adversely affect donors' health and ethnic identity. Transplantation centers using APOL1 genetic testing should address African American donors' concerns about APOL1 genetic testing to optimize future donors' informed consent practices.

Social Connectedness, Perceived Isolation, and Dementia: Does the Social Environment Moderate the Relationship Between Genetic Risk and Cognitive Well-Being?

Purpose of the Study

This study examined whether the social environment moderates the relationship between the APOE e4 allele and cognitive functioning.

Design and Methods

The Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study (ADAMS) data and multinomial logistic regression models were used to investigate these relationships for a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults aged 70 and older (n = 779).

Results

Living alone (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 5.814; p = .000) and self-reported loneliness (RRR = 1.928, p = .049) were associated with a greater risk of cognitive difficulty. Living arrangements, perceived social support, and loneliness were found to moderate the relationship between the APOE e4 allele and cognitive function.

Implications

The results support the need to consider the social context when examining cognitive well-being in later life. These findings also indicate a need for the development of policies and services that promote a rich social environment.

The impact of genetic counselors' use of facilitative strategies on cognitive and emotional processing of genetic risk disclosure for Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of genetic counselor (GC) communication on cognitive and emotional processing of Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information during discussions with patients with clinical diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment and their companion.

METHODS

79 recordings and transcripts of AD risk disclosure sessions collected as part of the fourth REVEAL Trial were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) and the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC). Multilevel analyses were used to determine the association between GCs' use of communication facilitation strategies and patient and companion use of words indicative of cognitive and emotional processing.

RESULTS

GC used somewhat more cognitive (14%) than emotional (10%) facilitation strategies. Both patients and companions used more words indicative of cognitive (18% and 17%) than emotional (6% and 5%) processing. GC use of facilitative strategies and patient and companion use of cognitive and emotional processing words were significantly associated in both unadjusted and adjusted models (all p-values<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

GCs' use of facilitative strategies assist in cognitive and emotional processing in a way that may be linked to therapeutic benefit.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings highlight mechanisms through which GCs may assist patients and companions to better understand and cope with risk information.

The PiGeOn project: protocol of a longitudinal study examining psychosocial and ethical issues and outcomes in germline genomic sequencing for cancer

Background

Advances in genomics offer promise for earlier detection or prevention of cancer, by personalisation of medical care tailored to an individual’s genomic risk status. However genome sequencing can generate an unprecedented volume of results for the patient to process with potential implications for their families and reproductive choices. This paper describes a protocol for a study (PiGeOn) that aims to explore how patients and their blood relatives experience germline genomic sequencing, to help guide the appropriate future implementation of genome sequencing into routine clinical practice.

Methods

We have designed a mixed-methods, prospective, cohort sub-study of a germline genomic sequencing study that targets adults with cancer suggestive of a genetic aetiology. One thousand probands and 2000 of their blood relatives will undergo germline genomic sequencing as part of the parent study in Sydney, Australia between 2016 and 2020. Test results are expected within12–15 months of recruitment. For the PiGeOn sub-study, participants will be invited to complete surveys at baseline, three months and twelve months after baseline using self-administered questionnaires, to assess the experience of long waits for results (despite being informed that results may not be returned) and expectations of receiving them. Subsets of both probands and blood relatives will be purposively sampled and invited to participate in three semi-structured qualitative interviews (at baseline and each follow-up) to triangulate the data. Ethical themes identified in the data will be used to inform critical revisions of normative ethical concepts or frameworks.

Discussion

This will be one of the first studies internationally to follow the psychosocial impact on probands and their blood relatives who undergo germline genome sequencing, over time. Study results will inform ongoing ethical debates on issues such as informed consent for genomic sequencing, and informing participants and their relatives of specific results. The study will also provide important outcome data concerning the psychological impact of prolonged waiting for germline genomic sequencing. These data are needed to ensure that when germline genomic sequencing is introduced into standard clinical settings, ethical concepts are embedded, and patients and their relatives are adequately prepared and supported during and after the testing process.

Perspectives on Communicating Biomarker-Based Assessments of Alzheimer's Disease to Cognitively Healthy Individuals

In clinical trials which target pathophysiological mechanisms associated with Alzheimer's disease, research participants who are recruited based on biomarker test results should be informed about their increased risk of developing Alzheimer's dementia. This paper presents the results of a qualitative focus group study of attitudes and concerns toward learning information about biomarker-based risk status among healthy research participants in the United Kingdom and Spain and people with dementia and their supporters/caregivers from countries represented in the European Working Group of People with Dementia of Alzheimer Europe. The study identified expectations related to learning risk status and preferences related to the content, quality, and follow-up of the disclosure process. The latter emphasize distinctions between risk and diagnoses, the importance of clear information about risk, and suggestions for risk reduction, as well as expectations for follow up and support. The implications of these preferences for practice are discussed. Providing details of research participants' experience and views may serve as a guide for the development of processes for the responsible disclosure of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers.

Communication Predictors of Patient and Companion Satisfaction with Alzheimer's Genetic Risk Disclosure

The objective of this study was to identify how features of Alzheimer's disease (AD) genetic risk disclosure communication relate to patient and visit companion satisfaction. We conducted secondary analyses of 79 session recordings from the fourth REVEAL Study, a randomized-controlled trial of AD genetic risk disclosure among patients with mild cognitive impairment. Patient and companion satisfaction were ascertained from postdisclosure surveys. The Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) was used to code triadic communication between the counselor, patient, and companion. High satisfaction was evident for 24% of patients (N = 19) and 48% of companions (N = 38). Multivariate logistic regressions showed that high patient satisfaction was associated with patients' expression of emotions (OR = 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0-1.1) and companions' questions about psychosocial and lifestyle topics (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.1-2.8). High companion satisfaction was positively related to the RIAS overall patient-centeredness score for the session (OR = 4.0, 95% CI: 1.0-15.6) (all p-values <0.05). Communication predictors of patient and companion satisfaction reflect specific or summary indicators of patient-centeredness. Findings also suggest that visit companions positively influence patient satisfaction. The study results support the growing literature and policy attention directed toward delivering family-centered care.

A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone

Purpose

Telephone disclosure of genetic test results can improve access to services. To date, studies of its impact have focused on return of Mendelian risk information, principally hereditary cancer syndromes.

Methods

In a multisite trial of Alzheimer’s disease genetic risk disclosure, asymptomatic adults were randomized to receive test results in-person or via telephone. Primary analyses examined patient outcomes 12 months after disclosure.

Results

Data from 257 participants showed that telephone disclosure occurred 7.4 days sooner and were 30% shorter, on average, than in-person disclosure (both p<0.001). Anxiety and depression scores were well below cutoffs for clinical concern across protocols. Comparing telephone and in-person disclosure protocols, 99% CIs of mean differences were within non-inferiority margins on scales assessing anxiety, depression, and test-related distress, but inconclusive about positive impact. No differences were observed on measures of recall and subjective impact. Sub-analyses supported non-inferiority on all outcomes among APOE ε4-negative participants. Sub-analyses were inconclusive for APOE ε4-positive participants, although mean anxiety and depression scores were still well below cutoffs for clinical concern.

Conclusion

Telephone disclosure of APOE results and risk for Alzheimer’s disease is generally safe and helps providers meet demands for services, even when results identify an increased risk for disease.

Disclosing genetic risk of Alzheimer's disease to cognitively impaired patients and visit companions: Findings from the REVEAL Study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the impact of genetic information on Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk communication to patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and their visit companions.

METHODS

Participants of the fourth REVEAL Study trial were randomized to receive AD risk assessments with or without genotype results. We coded 79 audio recorded risk disclosure sessions with the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Multilevel analyses explored differences in communication when disclosed risks were based on age and MCI diagnosis alone or in addition to APOE genotype status.

RESULTS

The addition of genotype results diminished the patient-centered nature of the sessions (p<0.001). When ε4 positive relative to ε4 negative results were disclosed, visit companions were more verbally active (p<0.05), disclosed more medical information (p<0.05), were more positive verbally and non-verbally (p<0.05) and were more proactive in setting the visit agenda (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of complex genetic risk information reduces the patient-centeredness of disclosure sessions. Visit companions are more actively engaged in session communication when patients are at increased genetic risk for AD.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

AD risk discussions can be improved by supporting the positive role of visit companions and addressing the challenges inherent in the delivery of complex genetic information in a patient-centered manner.

APOE-related risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia for prevention trials: An analysis of four cohorts

BACKGROUND

With the onset of prevention trials for individuals at high risk for Alzheimer disease, there is increasing need for accurate risk prediction to inform study design and enrollment, but available risk estimates are limited. We developed risk estimates for the incidence of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia among cognitively unimpaired individuals by APOE-e4 dose for the genetic disclosure process of the Alzheimer's Prevention Initiative Generation Study, a prevention trial in cognitively unimpaired APOE-e4/e4 homozygote individuals.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We included cognitively unimpaired individuals aged 60-75 y, consistent with Generation Study eligibility criteria, from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) (n = 5,073, 158 APOE-e4/e4), the Rotterdam Study (n = 6,399, 156 APOE-e4/e4), the Framingham Heart Study (n = 4,078, 67 APOE-e4/e4), and the Sacramento Area Latino Study on Aging (SALSA) (n = 1,294, 11 APOE-e4/e4). We computed stratified cumulative incidence curves by age (60-64, 65-69, 70-75 y) and APOE-e4 dose, adjusting for the competing risk of mortality, and determined risk of MCI and/or dementia by genotype and baseline age. We also used subdistribution hazard regression to model relative hazard based on age, APOE genotype, sex, education, family history of dementia, vascular risk, subjective memory concerns, and baseline cognitive performance. The four cohorts varied considerably in age, education, ethnicity/race, and APOE-e4 allele frequency. Overall, cumulative incidence was uniformly higher in NACC than in the population-based cohorts. Among APOE-e4/e4 individuals, 5-y cumulative incidence was as follows: in the 60-64-y age stratum, it ranged from 0% to 5.88% in the three population-based cohorts versus 23.06% in NACC; in the 65-69-y age stratum, from 9.42% to 10.39% versus 34.62%; and in the 70-75-y age stratum, from 18.64% to 33.33% versus 38.34%. Five-year incidence of dementia was negligible except for APOE-e4/e4 individuals and those over 70 y. Lifetime incidence (to age 80-85 y) of MCI or dementia for the APOE-e4/e4 individuals in the long-term Framingham and Rotterdam cohorts was 34.69%-38.45% at age 60-64 y, 30.76%-40.26% at 65-69 y, and 33.3%-35.17% at 70-75 y. Confidence limits for these estimates are often wide, particularly for APOE-e4/e4 individuals and for the dementia outcome at 5 y. In regression models, APOE-e4 dose and age both consistently increased risk, as did lower education, subjective memory concerns, poorer baseline cognitive performance, and family history of dementia. We discuss several limitations of the study, including the small numbers of APOE-e4/e4 individuals, missing data and differential dropout, limited ethnic and racial diversity, and differences in definitions of exposure and outcome variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Estimates of the absolute risk of MCI or dementia, particularly over short time intervals, are sensitive to sampling and a variety of methodological factors. Nonetheless, such estimates were fairly consistent across the population-based cohorts, and lower than those from a convenience cohort and those estimated in prior studies-with implications for informed consent and design for clinical trials targeting high-risk individuals.

Development of a Standardized Approach to Disclosing Amyloid Imaging Research Results in Mild Cognitive Impairment

The increased use of PET amyloid imaging in clinical research has sparked numerous concerns about whether and how to return such research test results to study participants. Chief among these is the question of how best to disclose amyloid imaging research results to individuals who have cognitive symptoms that could impede comprehension of the information conveyed. We systematically developed and evaluated informational materials for use in pre-test counseling and post-test disclosures of amyloid imaging research results in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Using simulated sessions, persons with MCI and their family care partners (N = 10 dyads) received fictitious but realistic information regarding brain amyloid status, followed by an explanation of how results impact Alzheimer's disease risk. Satisfaction surveys, comprehension assessments, and focus group data were analyzed to evaluate the materials developed. The majority of persons with MCI and their care partners comprehended and were highly satisfied with the information presented. Focus group data reinforced findings of high satisfaction and included 6 recommendations for practice: 1) offer pre-test counseling, 2) use clear graphics, 3) review participants' own brain images during disclosures, 4) offer take-home materials, 5) call participants post-disclosure to address emerging questions, and 6) communicate seamlessly with primary care providers. Further analysis of focus group data revealed that participants understood the limitations of amyloid imaging, but nevertheless viewed the prospect of learning one's amyloid status as valuable and empowering.

Evaluation of a Web-based decision aid for people considering the APOE genetic test for Alzheimer risk

PURPOSE

With the increasing interest in apolipoprotein E (APOE) genetic testing to estimate the risk of developing late-onset Alzheimer disease, new educational tools are needed to help people make the best decision for themselves about whether to undergo this test. This study evaluated an online tool to assist in this decision process.

METHODS

A prototype decision aid was studied in a two-part survey that collected data from participants before and after they examined the decision aid. Both surveys had multiple-choice options and opportunities for open-ended responses, yielding quantitative and qualitative information. The responses before and after use of the aid were compared for each participant.

RESULTS

A total of 1,262 individuals completed both surveys. The overall effectiveness of the decision aid was shown by three measures: 94% found the decision aid very helpful or somewhat helpful; general knowledge was increased; and some people changed their minds about APOE genetic testing, with 35% shifting to a higher likelihood of undergoing the test and 20% to a lower likelihood. Suggestions for improvements were noted and incorporated into the online tool.

CONCLUSION

This decision aid can provide useful educational assistance to many individuals as they consider APOE genetic testing as well as facilitate further discussions with their health-care providers.Genet Med advance online publication 03 November 2016.

Florbetapir F18 PET Amyloid Neuroimaging and Characteristics in Patients With Mild and Moderate Alzheimer Dementia

BACKGROUND

Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) is challenging, with a 70.9%-87.3% sensitivity and 44.3%-70.8% specificity, compared with autopsy diagnosis. Florbetapir F18 positron emission tomography (FBP-PET) estimates beta-amyloid plaque density antemortem.

METHODS

Of 2052 patients (≥55 years old) clinically diagnosed with mild or moderate AD dementia from 2 solanezumab clinical trials, 390 opted to participate in a FBP-PET study addendum. We analyzed baseline prerandomization characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 22.4% had negative FBP-PET scans, whereas 72.5% of mild and 86.9% of moderate AD patients had positive results. No baseline clinical variable reliably differentiated negative from positive FBP-PET scan groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These data confirm the challenges of correctly diagnosing AD without using biomarkers. FBP-PET can aid AD dementia differential diagnosis by detecting amyloid pathology antemortem, even when the diagnosis of AD is made by expert clinicians.

Participant use and communication of findings from exome sequencing: a mixed-methods study

Purpose

This study investigated how genome sequencing results affect health behaviors, affect, and communication.

Methods

We report on 29 participants who received a sequence result in the ClinSeq^® study, a cohort of well-educated, post-reproductive volunteers. A mixed methods design was used to explore respondents’ use, communication, and perceived utility of results.

Results

Most participants (72%) shared their result with at least one health care provider, and 31% reported changes to their health care. Participants scored high on the Positive Experiences subscale and low on the Distress subscale of a modified version of the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA). The majority (93%) shared their result with at least one family member. Participant’s described deriving personal utility from their results.

Conclusions

This paper is the first to describe research participants’ reactions to actionable sequencing results. Our findings suggest clinical and personal benefit from receiving sequencing results, both of which may contribute to improved health for the recipients. Given the participants’ largely positive or neutral affective responses and disclosure of their results to physicians and relatives, health care providers should redirect concern from the potential for distress and attend to motivating patients to follow their medical recommendations.

Management of Incidental Findings in Clinical Genomic Sequencing

Genomic sequencing is becoming accurate, fast, and increasingly inexpensive, and is rapidly being incorporated into clinical practice. Incidental or secondary findings, which can occur in large numbers from genomic sequencing, are a potential barrier to the utility of this new technology due to their relatively high prevalence and the lack of evidence or guidelines available to guide their clinical interpretation. This unit reviews the definition, classification, and management of incidental findings from genomic sequencing. The unit focuses on the clinical aspects of handling incidental findings, with an emphasis on the key role of clinical context in defining incidental findings and determining their clinical relevance and utility.

Clinical use of amyloid-positron emission tomography neuroimaging: Practical and bioethical considerations

Until recently, estimation of β-amyloid plaque density as a key element for identifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology as the cause of cognitive impairment was only possible at autopsy. Now with amyloid-positron emission tomography (amyloid-PET) neuroimaging, this AD hallmark can be detected antemortem. Practitioners and patients need to better understand potential diagnostic benefits and limitations of amyloid-PET and the complex practical, ethical, and social implications surrounding this new technology. To complement the practical considerations, Eli Lilly and Company sponsored a Bioethics Advisory Board to discuss ethical issues that might arise from clinical use of amyloid-PET neuroimaging with patients being evaluated for causes of cognitive decline. To best address the multifaceted issues associated with amyloid-PET neuroimaging, we recommend this technology be used only by experienced imaging and treating physicians in appropriately selected patients and only in the context of a comprehensive clinical evaluation with adequate explanations before and after the scan.

Genetic studies of quantitative MCI and AD phenotypes in ADNI: Progress, opportunities, and plans

INTRODUCTION

Genetic data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) have been crucial in advancing the understanding of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology. Here, we provide an update on sample collection, scientific progress and opportunities, conceptual issues, and future plans.

METHODS

Lymphoblastoid cell lines and DNA and RNA samples from blood have been collected and banked, and data and biosamples have been widely disseminated. To date, APOE genotyping, genome-wide association study (GWAS), and whole exome and whole genome sequencing data have been obtained and disseminated.

RESULTS

ADNI genetic data have been downloaded thousands of times, and >300 publications have resulted, including reports of large-scale GWAS by consortia to which ADNI contributed. Many of the first applications of quantitative endophenotype association studies used ADNI data, including some of the earliest GWAS and pathway-based studies of biospecimen and imaging biomarkers, as well as memory and other clinical/cognitive variables. Other contributions include some of the first whole exome and whole genome sequencing data sets and reports in healthy controls, mild cognitive impairment, and AD.

DISCUSSION

Numerous genetic susceptibility and protective markers for AD and disease biomarkers have been identified and replicated using ADNI data and have heavily implicated immune, mitochondrial, cell cycle/fate, and other biological processes. Early sequencing studies suggest that rare and structural variants are likely to account for significant additional phenotypic variation. Longitudinal analyses of transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic, and epigenomic changes will also further elucidate dynamic processes underlying preclinical and prodromal stages of disease. Integration of this unique collection of multiomics data within a systems biology framework will help to separate truly informative markers of early disease mechanisms and potential novel therapeutic targets from the vast background of less relevant biological processes. Fortunately, a broad swath of the scientific community has accepted this grand challenge.

Development of a process to disclose amyloid imaging results to cognitively normal older adult research participants

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to develop a process to maximize the safety and effectiveness of disclosing Positron Emission Tomography (PET) amyloid imaging results to cognitively normal older adults participating in Alzheimer's disease secondary prevention studies such as the Anti-Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's Disease (A4) Study.

METHODS

Using a modified Delphi Method to develop consensus on best practices, we gathered and analyzed data over three rounds from experts in two relevant fields: informed consent for genetic testing or human amyloid imaging.

RESULTS

Experts reached consensus on (1) text for a brochure that describes amyloid imaging to a person who is considering whether to undergo such imaging in the context of a clinical trial, and (2) a process for amyloid PET result disclosure within such trials. Recommendations included: During consent, potential participants should complete an educational session, where they receive verbal and written information covering what is known and unknown about amyloid imaging, including possible results and their meaning, implications of results for risk of future cognitive decline, and information about Alzheimer's and risk factors. Participants should be screened for anxiety and depression to determine suitability to receive amyloid imaging information. The person conducting the sessions should check comprehension and be skilled in communication and recognizing distress. Imaging should occur on a separate day from consent, and disclosure on a separate day from imaging. Disclosure should occur in person, with time for questions. At disclosure, investigators should assess mood and willingness to receive results, and provide a written results report. Telephone follow-up within a few days should assess the impact of disclosure, and periodic scheduled assessments of depression and anxiety, with additional monitoring and follow-up for participants showing distress, should be performed.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a document for use with potential study participants to describe the process of amyloid imaging and the implications of amyloid imaging results; and a disclosure process with attention to ongoing monitoring of both mood and safety to receive this information. This document and process will be used in the A4 Study and can be adapted for other research settings.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00089882 and NCT00462917.

Factors affecting recall of different types of personal genetic information about Alzheimer's disease risk: the REVEAL study

METHODS

Data were obtained through a multisite clinical trial in which different types of genetic risk-related information were disclosed to individuals (n = 246) seeking a risk assessment for Alzheimer's disease.

RESULTS

Six weeks after disclosure, 83% of participants correctly recalled the number of risk-increasing APOE alleles they possessed, and 74% correctly recalled their APOE genotype. While 84% of participants recalled their lifetime risk estimate to within 5 percentage points, only 51% correctly recalled their lifetime risk estimate exactly. Correct recall of the number of APOE risk-increasing alleles was independently associated with higher education (p < 0.001), greater numeracy (p < 0.05) and stronger family history of Alzheimer's disease (p < 0.05). Before adjustments for confounding, correct recall of APOE genotype was also associated with higher education, greater numeracy and stronger family history of Alzheimer's disease, as well as with higher comfort with numbers and European American ethnicity (all p < 0.05). Correct recall of the lifetime risk estimate was independently associated only with younger age (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Recall of genotype-specific information is high, but recall of exact risk estimates is lower. Incorrect recall of numeric risk may lead to distortions in understanding risk. Further research is needed to determine how best to communicate different types of genetic risk information to patients, particularly to those with lower educational levels and lower numeracy. Health-care professionals should be aware that each type of genetic risk information may be differentially interpreted and retained by patients and that some patient subgroups may have more problems with recall than others.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Communication of genetic test results to family and health-care providers following disclosure of research results

PURPOSE

Few studies have examined methods to promote communication following the return of DNA mismatch repair genetic test results obtained during research. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate a telephone protocol for returning research results of DNA mismatch repair gene testing to identify Lynch syndrome.

METHODS

We invited individuals with known DNA mismatch repair mutations in their family, who were enrolled in the Colon Cancer Family Registry at the Mayo Clinic, to participate in this study. Participants completed surveys before and 6 months after DNA mismatch repair test result disclosure.

RESULTS

Among 107 participants, 79% opted to learn their DNA mismatch repair test results; of these, 44 (41%) carried DNA mismatch repair mutations. After disclosure, 54% reported screening for any type of cancer. Among carriers, >74% reported communicating results to family; communication was predicted by baseline confidence in coping with the genetic test result (Z = 1.97; P = 0.04). Result disclosure to a physician was predicted by greater perceived cancer risk (Z = 2.08; P = 0.03) and greater intention to share results with family (Z = 3.07; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Research versus clinically based gene disclosure presents challenges. A telephone disclosure process for the return of research-based results among Lynch syndrome families led to high rates of result uptake and participant communication of results to providers and family members.