Concerns about Genetic Discrimination after Regulation: A Qualitative Study of the Situation Regarding BRCA and Huntington’s Disease in Belgium

"Uninsurable because of a genetic test": a qualitative study of consumer views about the use of genetic test results in Australian life insurance

Genetic testing can provide valuable information to mitigate personal disease risk, but the use of genetic results in life insurance underwriting is known to deter many consumers from pursuing genetic testing. In 2019, following Australian Federal Parliamentary Inquiry recommendations, the Financial Services Council (FSC) introduced an industry-led partial moratorium, prohibiting life insurance companies from using genetic test results for policies up to $AUD500,000. We used semi-structured interviews to explore genetic test consumers' experiences and views about the FSC moratorium and the use of genetic results by life insurers. Individuals who participated in an online survey and agreed to be re-contacted to discuss the issue further were invited. Interviews were 20-30-min long, conducted via video conference, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive content analysis. Twenty-seven participants were interviewed. Despite the moratorium, concerns about genetic discrimination in life insurance were prevalent. Participants reported instances where life insurers did not consider risk mitigation when assessing risk for policies based on genetic results, contrary to legal requirements. Most participants felt that the moratorium provided inadequate protection against discrimination, and that government legislation regulating life insurers' use of genetic results is necessary. Many participants perceived the financial limits to be inadequate, given the cost-of-living in Australia. Our findings indicate that from the perspective of participants, the moratorium has not been effective in allaying fears about genetic discrimination or ensuring adequate access to life insurance products. Concern about genetic discrimination in life insurance remains prevalent in Australia.

Medicolegal and insurance issues regarding BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene tests in high income countries

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome is an autosomal dominant cancer susceptibility syndrome mainly due to variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Patients presenting with BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations have a lifetime risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer (80% and 40%, respectively). Genetic testing to explore the predisposition to develop cancer represents a pivotal factor in such cases, and this review wants to explore the main implications in terms of medicolegal liability and insurance issues. Medicolegal issues related to these diagnostic processes include: (a) failure to recommend the test; (b) failure to properly interpret the test; (c) failure to correctly translate results into clinical practice; (d) lack of informed consent; and (e) failure to refer patients to specialized genetic counseling. Such errors may lead to compensation since the legal burden inherent in the efficacy of prophylactic interventions is a proof that requires the so-called 'preponderance of the evidence'. Concerning insurance issues, the carriers of such alleles without cancer are healthy because the genetic predisposition is not a disease per se but represents a (relevant) health risk. However, disclosure of these conditions can be impelled by insurers. It can lead to so-called 'genetic discrimination' because insurance companies might use genetic information to limit insurance options or increase their costs. Many private and public healthcare funders do not cover risk reducing surgeries, even when recommended as part of a risk reduction management plan for BRCA gene mutation carriers. Here, positions on these matters from different high income countries are discussed, stressing the importance of a common supranational or international regulatory framework to reach a trade-off between the economic interests of insurers and the rights of carriers not to disclose extremely sensitive information.

Risk-Stratified Approach to Breast Cancer Screening in Canada: Women's Knowledge of the Legislative Context and Concerns about Discrimination from Genetic and Other Predictive Health Data

The success of risk-stratified approaches in improving population-based breast cancer screening programs depends in no small part on women’s buy-in. Fear of genetic discrimination (GD) could be a potential barrier to genetic testing uptake as part of risk assessment. Thus, the objective of this study was twofold. First, to evaluate Canadian women’s knowledge of the legislative context governing GD. Second, to assess their concerns about the possible use of breast cancer risk levels by insurance companies or employers. We use a cross-sectional survey of 4293 (age: 30–69) women, conducted in four Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Colombia, Ontario and Québec). Canadian women’s knowledge of the regulatory framework for GD is relatively limited, with some gaps and misconceptions noted. About a third (34.7%) of the participants had a lot of concerns about the use of their health information by employers or insurers; another third had some concerns (31.9%), while 20% had no concerns. There is a need to further educate and inform the Canadian public about GD and the legal protections that exist to prevent it. Enhanced knowledge could facilitate the implementation and uptake of risk prediction informed by genetic factors, such as the risk-stratified approach to breast cancer screening that includes risk levels.

Normalising life at risk of Huntington's disease. A qualitative study of backgrounds and coping strategies of fears of genetic discrimination

Studies in the sociology of genetics have shown how living with a predisposition to a genetic disorder often comes with significant psycho-social burdens and struggles. One of these struggles is the fear of genetic discrimination. Despite genetic non-discrimination regulations, research shows people still worry about being subjected to genetic discrimination. This article adds to this existing body of literature by showing why people still worry about genetic discrimination and how they cope with these worries. Our findings derive from an analysis of semi-structured, in-depth interviews with individuals at risk for Huntington's disease (HD) in Belgium. Concerns of genetic discrimination are grounded in the participants' family backgrounds. Our participants, having witnessed numerous events in which symptomatic relatives suffered discrimination and stigmatisation, expressed heightened fears of facing genetic discrimination. Further, this article provides insight into the strategies participants use to cope with these fears. Two ways of normalising life were identified-while some persist in keeping their genetic risk a secret, other participants explicitly choose to be transparent about their genetic risk, desiring a level of openness. However, while they want to 'break' with their family background, participants who choose to be open are still held back by their worries about genetic discrimination by organisational actors. 'Normalising genetics' appears to be particularly challenging considering the remaining stereotypes and stigma surrounding genetic diseases.

Knowledge and Attitudes of Medical and Health Science Students in the United Arab Emirates toward Genomic Medicine and Pharmacogenomics: A Cross-Sectional Study

Medical and health science students represent future health professionals, and their perceptions are essential to increasing awareness on genomic medicine and pharmacogenomics. Lack of education is one of the significant barriers that may affect health professional’s ability to interpret and communicate pharmacogenomics information and results to their clients. Our aim was to assess medical and health science students’ knowledge, attitudes and perception for a better genomic medicine and pharmacogenomics practice in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated questionnaire distributed electronically to students recruited using random and snowball sampling methods. A total of 510 students consented and completed the questionnaire between December 2018 and October 2019. The mean knowledge score (SD) for students was 5.4 (±2.7). There were significant differences in the levels of knowledge by the year of study of bachelor’s degree students, the completion status of training or education in pharmacogenomics (PGX) or pharmacogenetics and the completion of an internship or study abroad program (p-values < 0.05. The top two barriers that students identified in the implementation of genomic medicine and pharmacogenomics were lack of training or education (59.7%) and lack of clinical guidelines (58.7%). Concerns regarding confidentiality and discrimination were stated. The majority of medical and health science students had positive attitudes but only had a fair level of knowledge. Stakeholders in the UAE must strive to acquaint their students with up-to-date knowledge of genomic medicine and pharmacogenomics.

Gene Therapy for Neurodegenerative Diseases: Slowing Down the Ticking Clock

Gene therapy is an emerging and powerful therapeutic tool to deliver functional genetic material to cells in order to correct a defective gene. During the past decades, several studies have demonstrated the potential of AAV-based gene therapies for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. While some clinical studies have failed to demonstrate therapeutic efficacy, the use of AAV as a delivery tool has demonstrated to be safe. Here, we discuss the past, current and future perspectives of gene therapies for neurodegenerative diseases. We also discuss the current advances on the newly emerging RNAi-based gene therapies which has been widely studied in preclinical model and recently also made it to the clinic.