Geriatricians’ Perspectives on the Multiple Dimensions of Utility of Genetic Testing for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Qualitative Study

Research Participants' Perspectives on Precision Diagnostics for Alzheimer's Disease

BACKGROUND

Understanding research participants' responses to learning Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information is important to inform clinical implementation of precision diagnostics given rapid advances in disease modifying therapies.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed participants' perspectives on the meaning of their amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging results for their health, self-efficacy to understand their results, psychological impact of learning their results, experience receiving their results from the clinical team, and interest in genetic testing for AD risk.

METHODS

We surveyed individuals who were being clinically evaluated for AD and received PET imaging six weeks after the return of results. We analyzed responses to close-ended survey items by PET result using Fisher's exact test and qualitatively coded open-ended responses.

RESULTS

A total of 88 participants completed surveys, most of whom had mild cognitive impairment due to AD (38.6%), AD (28.4%), or were cognitively unimpaired (21.6%). Participants subjectively understood their results (25.3% strongly agreed, 41.8% agreed), which could help them plan (16.5% strongly agreed, 49.4% agreed). Participants with a negative PET result (n = 25) reported feelings of relief (Fisher's exact p < 0.001) and happiness (p < 0.001) more frequently than those with a positive result. Most participants felt that they were treated respectfully and were comfortable voicing concerns during the disclosure process. Genetic testing was anticipated to be useful for medical care decisions (48.2%) and to inform family members about AD risk (42.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants had high subjective understanding and self-efficacy around their PET results and did not experience negative psychological effects. Interest in genetic testing was high.

Validation of the "Perceptions Regarding pRE-Symptomatic Alzheimer's Disease Screening" (PRE-ADS) Questionnaire in the German Population: Attitudes, Motivations, and Barriers to Pre-Symptomatic Dementia Screening

BACKGROUND

Attitudes, motivations, and barriers to pre-symptomatic screening for Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the general population are unclear, and validated measurement tools are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

Translation and validation of the German version of the "Perceptions regarding pRE-symptomatic Alzheimer's Disease Screening" (PRE-ADS) questionnaire.

METHODS

A convenience sample (N = 256) was recruited via an online platform. Validation of the PRE-ADS-D consisted of assessments of reliability, structural validity using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and construct validity using known-group tests. A subscale "Acceptability of Screening", with 5 PRE-ADS-D items, was extracted to measure acceptance of screening in clinical practice. The STROBE checklist was used for reporting.

RESULTS

EFA revealed a three-factor model for the PRE-ADS-D. Acceptable to good internal consistency was found for the 25-item scale (α= 0.78), as well as for the three factors "Concerns about Screening" (α= 0.85), "Intention to be Screened" (α= 0.87), and "Preventive Health Behaviors" (α= 0.81). Construct validity was confirmed for both the 25-item PRE-ADS-D and the "Acceptability of Screening" scale (α= 0.91). Overall, 51.2% of the participants showed a preference for screening. Non-parametric tests were conducted to further explore group differences of the sample.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRE-ADS-D is a reliable and valid tool to measure attitudes, motives, and barriers regarding pre-symptomatic dementia screening in the German-speaking general population. Additionally, the subscale "Acceptability of Screening" demonstrated good construct validity and reliability, suggesting its promising potential as a practical tool in clinical practice.

Communicating and Using Dementia Risk Evidence

Advances in biomarkers, genetics, and other data used as dementia risk evidence (DRE) are increasingly informing clinical diagnosis and management. The purpose of this Mini-Forum is to provide a solutions-based discussion of the ethical and legal gaps and practical questions about how to use and communicate these data. Investigators often use DRE in research. When participants ask for their personal results, investigators have concerns. Will data that was intended to study groups be valid for individuals? Will sharing data cause distress? Debates around sharing DRE became heated when blood-based amyloid tests and amyloid reducing drugs appeared poised to enable clinicians easily to identify people with elevated brain amyloid and reduce it with a drug. Such an approach would transform the traditional role of DRE from investigational to foundational; however, then the high costs, uncertain clinical benefits and risks of the therapy led to an urgent need for education to support clinical decision making. Further complicating DRE use are direct to consumer genetic testing and increasingly available biomarker testing. Withholding DRE becomes less feasible and public education around responsible use and understanding become vital. A critical answer to these legal and ethical issues is supporting education that clearly delineates known risks, benefits, and gaps in knowledge, and communication to promote understanding among researchers, clinicians, patients, and all stakeholders. This paper provides an overview and identifies general concepts and resource documents that support more informed discussions for individuals and interdisciplinary groups.