Benefits and Risks of Direct-to-Consumer Testing

Direct-to-consumer testing as consumer initiated testing: compromises to the testing process and opportunities for quality improvement

Direct-to-consumer testing (DTCT) refers to commercial laboratory tests initiated by laypersons without the involvement of healthcare professionals. As this market grows in size and variety of products, a clear definition of DTCT to ground the conceptualization of their harms and benefits is needed. We describe how three different modalities of DTCT (home self-testing, self-sampled tests, and direct access tests) present caveats to the traditional testing process ('brain-to-brain loop'), and how this might differ between medical vs. non-medical laboratories. We make recommendations for ways to improve quality and reduce errors with respect to DTCT. The potential benefits and harms of DTCT will invariably depend on the context and situation of individual consumers and the types of tests involved. Importantly, implications for both consumers and the healthcare system should be considered, such as the effects on improving health outcomes and reducing unnecessary testing and use of clinical resources. 'Consumer initiation' must be a central defining characteristic of DTCT, to clearly demarcate the key drawbacks as well as opportunities of this type of testing from a laboratory specialists' perspective. The concept of 'consumer initiated testing' should also help define DTCT regulation, and provide a locus of efforts to support consumers as the main decision-makers in the purchasing and conducting of these tests in the absence of clinician gatekeeping.

Expanding access to genetic testing for pancreatic cancer

Among individuals with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) 5-10% have a pathogenic germline variant (PGV) in a PDAC susceptibility gene. Guidelines recommend genetic testing among all individuals with PDAC. Additionally, at-risk relatives of PDAC patients benefit from their own genetic education, risk assessment, and testing. Multigene panel testing (MGPT) can identify individuals with inherited cancer risk who can benefit from early cancer surveillance and risk reduction strategies. This manuscript discusses various healthcare delivery models for MGPT including traditional in-person genetic counseling, novel integrated in-person infrastructures, telemedicine genetics care via telephone- or video-visits and direct-to-consumer testing. Barriers and facilitators to care on the individual, provider, and system level are also outlined including specific considerations for historically marginalized communities.

A Randomized Trial of Two Remote Health Care Delivery Models on the Uptake of Genetic Testing and Impact on Patient-Reported Psychological Outcomes in Families With Pancreatic Cancer: The Genetic Education, Risk Assessment, and Testing (GENERATE) Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Genetic testing uptake for cancer susceptibility in family members of patients with cancer is suboptimal. Among relatives of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), The GENetic Education, Risk Assessment, and TEsting (GENERATE) study evaluated 2 online genetic education/testing delivery models and their impact on patient-reported psychological outcomes.

METHODS

Eligible participants had ≥1 first-degree relative with PDAC, or ≥1 first-/second-degree relative with PDAC with a known pathogenic germline variant in 1 of 13 PDAC predisposition genes. Participants were randomized by family, between May 8, 2019, and June 1, 2021. Arm 1 participants underwent a remote interactive telemedicine session and online genetic education. Arm 2 participants were offered online genetic education only. All participants were offered germline testing. The primary outcome was genetic testing uptake, compared by permutation tests and mixed-effects logistic regression models. We hypothesized that Arm 1 participants would have a higher genetic testing uptake than Arm 2. Validated surveys were administered to assess patient-reported anxiety, depression, and cancer worry at baseline and 3 months postintervention.

RESULTS

A total of 424 families were randomized, including 601 participants (n = 296 Arm 1; n = 305 Arm 2), 90% of whom completed genetic testing (Arm 1 [87%]; Arm 2 [93%], P = .014). Arm 1 participants were significantly less likely to complete genetic testing compared with Arm 2 participants (adjusted ratio [Arm1/Arm2] 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98). Among participants who completed patient-reported psychological outcomes questionnaires (Arm 1 [n = 194]; Arm 2 [n = 206]), the intervention did not affect mean anxiety, depression, or cancer worry scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Remote genetic education and testing can be a successful and complementary option for delivering genetics care. (Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT03762590).

Optimizing the data in direct access testing: information technology to support an emerging care model

Direct access testing (DAT) is an emerging care model that provides on-demand laboratory services for certain preventative, diagnostic, and monitoring indications. Unlike conventional testing models where health care providers order tests and where sample collection is performed onsite at the clinic or laboratory, most interactions between DAT consumers and the laboratory are virtual. Tests are ordered and results delivered online, and specimens are frequently self-collected at home with virtual support. Thus, DAT depends on high-quality information technology (IT) tools and optimized data utilization to a greater degree than conventional laboratory testing. This review critically discusses the United States DAT landscape in relation to IT to highlight digital challenges and opportunities for consumers, health care systems, providers, and laboratories. DAT offers consumers increased autonomy over the testing experience, cost, and data sharing, but the current capacity to integrate DAT as a care option into the conventional patient-provider model is lacking and will require innovative approaches to accommodate. Likewise, both consumers and health care providers need transparent information about the quality of DAT laboratories and clinical decision support to optimize appropriate use of DAT as a part of comprehensive care. Interoperability barriers will require intentional approaches to integrating DAT-derived data into the electronic health records of health systems nationally. This includes ensuring the laboratory results are appropriately captured for downstream data analytic pipelines that are used to satisfy population health and research needs. Despite the data- and IT-related challenges for widespread incorporation of DAT into routine health care, DAT has the potential to improve health equity by providing versatile, discreet, and affordable testing options for patients who have been marginalized by the current limitations of health care delivery in the United States.

Direct-to-consumer tests advertised online in Australia and their implications for medical overuse: systematic online review and a typology of clinical utility

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to map the range and variety of direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests advertised online in Australia and analyse their potential clinical utility and implications for medical overuse.

DESIGN

Systematic online search of DTC test products in Google and Google Shopping. DTC test advertisements data were collected and analysed to develop a typology of potential clinical utility of the tests at population level, assessing their potential benefits and harms using available evidence, informed by concepts of medical overuse.

RESULTS

We identified 484 DTC tests (103 unique products), ranging from $A12.99 to $A1947 in cost (mean $A197.83; median $A148.50). Using our typology, we assigned the tests into one of four categories: tests with potential clinical utility (10.7%); tests with limited clinical utility (30.6%); non-evidence-based commercial 'health checks' (41.9%); and tests whose methods and/or target conditions are not recognised by the general medical community (16.7%). Of the products identified, 56% did not state that they offered pretest or post-test consultation, and 51% did not report analytical performance of the test or laboratory accreditation.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-Australia study shows most DTC tests sold online have low potential clinical utility, with healthy consumers constituting the main target market. Harms may be caused by overdiagnosis, high rates of false positives and treatment decisions led by non-evidence-based tests, as well as financial costs of unnecessary and inappropriate testing. Regulatory mechanisms should demand a higher standard of evidence of clinical utility and efficacy for DTC tests. Better transparency and reporting of health outcomes, and the development of decision-support resources for consumers are needed.

Novel Insights From Basic Science in Psoriatic Disease at the GRAPPA 2022 Annual Meeting

Recent basic science advances in psoriatic disease (PsD) were presented and discussed at the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2022 annual meeting. Topics included clinical applications of biomarkers, what the future of biomarkers for PsD may hold, the challenges of developing biomarker research to the point of clinical utility, advances in total-body positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging, and emerging concepts from single-cell studies in PsD.

Direct-to-consumer testing - benefits for consumers, people with disease and public health

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests can be defined as any in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) test or, more broadly, any medical test using an IVD or medical device, that is marketed directly to consumers without involvement of a health care provider (HCP). Examples are pregnancy tests, alcohol breath tests, blood pressure measurements (medical device), coagulation tests (INR), self-monitoring of blood glucose, continuous glucose monitoring (medical device), HIV tests, HPV tests, SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests, or genetic tests. DTC tests fulfil various customer needs such as making rapid decisions (e.g. glucose monitoring for insulin dosing, SARS-CoV-2 antigen test, hormone test identifying fertile days, alcohol test), monitoring chronic conditions between consultations (e.g. diabetes, lipidaemia, hypertension), saving time and reducing consultations (e.g. INR, SARS-CoV-2 antigen test, blood pressure monitoring), screening for disease when no symptoms are present (e.g. occult blood, cholesterol, triglycerides, SARS-CoV2 antigen test), or maintaining privacy (e.g. pregnancy test, HIV test, HPV test, certain genetic tests). Further, DTC tests can reduce cost and expand access to care in countries with limited resources and can support healthcare systems in extraordinary circumstances such as a pandemic. Valid concerns about DTC testing need to be described, addressed and resolved with the help of authorities and regulators in collaboration with HCP and should not detract from the advantages DTC tests can provide. HCP should play a more prominent role in educating the public through mass media and social media on the proper use of DTC tests and help to pinpoint problem areas.

Regulation of Laboratory-Developed Tests in Preventive Oncology: Emerging Needs and Opportunities

Cancer predictive or diagnostic assays, offered as Laboratory-Developed Tests (LDTs), have been subject to regulatory authority and enforcement discretion by the US Food and Drug Administration. Many LDTs enter the market without US Food and Drug Administration or any regulatory review. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments focuses on analytic performance, but has limited oversight of the quality or utility of LDTs, including whether patients have been harmed as a result of their use. Increasingly, LDTs for cancer risk or early detection have been marketed directly to consumers, with many LDT developers depicting these tests, requested by patients but ordered by personal or company-associated physicians, as procedures falling under the practice of medicine. This patchwork of regulation and enforcement uncertainty regarding LDTs and public concerns about accuracy of tests given emergency authorization during the COVID-19 pandemic led to the Verifying Accurate Leading-edge IVCT (in vitro clinical test) Development Act of 2021. This pending federal legislation represents an opportunity to harmonize regulatory policies and address growing concerns over quality, utility, and safety of LDTs for cancer genomics, including tests marketed directly to consumers. We review here questions regarding the potential benefits and harms of some cancer-related LDTs for cancer risk and presymptomatic molecular diagnosis, increasingly marketed to oncologists or directly to the worried well. We offer specific proposals to strengthen oversight of the accuracy and clinical utility of cancer genetic testing to ensure public safety.

Genetic testing-whether to allow complete freedom? Direct to consumer tests versus genetic tests for medical purposes

Direct-to-consumer tests opened the opportunity of genetic testing without medical supervision, e.g., without medical referral and medical interpretation of the results. Thus, these approaches allow for free access to information concerning individual genetic profile increasing the area of personal freedom, but also posing the risk of false (positive and negative) or misinterpreted results along with health and psychological negative consequences. The paper discusses medical and non-medical applications of DTC, exploring also the legal framework implemented by European states and organizations. These legal acts strive to control the developing DTC market through such basic principles as patient protection, informed consent, medical information confidentiality, and the rights to know and to refuse knowledge about one's genetic predispositions.

Potential Pitfalls of Reproductive Direct-to-Consumer Testing

The availability of direct-to-consumer (DTC) testing has dramatically increased over the past 2 decades, particularly those targeted at reproduction and fertility. Several ethical concerns exist with regard to DTC tests, including the lack of governmental regulation and consumer protection, standardized laboratory methodology, and clinical validity and actionability. Physicians must familiarize themselves with the pitfalls of DTC tests to best aid patients in interpreting DTC test results and guide them toward evidence-based treatment plans.