Magan Trottier, Dina Green, Hannah Ovadia, Amanda Catchings, Julia Gruberg, Victoria Groner, Catherine Fanjoy, Sita Dandiker, Kathleen Blazer, Jada G Hamilton, Kenneth Offit
{"title":"Genetics healthcare providers' experiences counseling patients with results from consumer genomic testing.","authors":"Magan Trottier, Dina Green, Hannah Ovadia, Amanda Catchings, Julia Gruberg, Victoria Groner, Catherine Fanjoy, Sita Dandiker, Kathleen Blazer, Jada G Hamilton, Kenneth Offit","doi":"10.1002/mgg3.2508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Consumer genomic testing (CGT), including direct-to-consumer and consumer-initiated testing, is increasingly widespread yet has limited regulatory oversight. To assess the current state, we surveyed genetics healthcare providers' experiences with CGT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective survey about experiences counseling on CGT results was completed by 139 respondents recruited from the National Society of Genetic Counselors, Clinical Cancer Genomics Community of Practice, and genetics professional societies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among respondents, 41% disagreed with the statement that potential benefits of CGT outweigh harms, 21% agreed, and 38% were undecided. A total of 94% encountered ≥1 challenge counseling CGT patients, including adverse psychosocial events (76%), incorrect variant interpretation (68%), and unconfirmed results (69%); unconfirmed results were more common among oncology providers (p = 0.03). Providers reporting higher total challenge scores (p = 0.004) or more psychosocial or interpretation challenges (p ≤ 0.01) were more likely to indicate CGT harms outweigh benefits. Those with higher CGT clinical volume were more likely to indicate benefits outweigh harms (p = 0.003). Additional CGT challenges included patient understanding and communication of results, false negatives, incorrect testing/care, and financial costs; seven respondents (6%) documented positive outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Providers counseling CGT patients encounter psychosocial and medical challenges. Collaborations between regulators, CGT laboratories, providers, and consumers may help mitigate risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":18852,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11322993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mgg3.2508","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Consumer genomic testing (CGT), including direct-to-consumer and consumer-initiated testing, is increasingly widespread yet has limited regulatory oversight. To assess the current state, we surveyed genetics healthcare providers' experiences with CGT.
Methods: A retrospective survey about experiences counseling on CGT results was completed by 139 respondents recruited from the National Society of Genetic Counselors, Clinical Cancer Genomics Community of Practice, and genetics professional societies.
Results: Among respondents, 41% disagreed with the statement that potential benefits of CGT outweigh harms, 21% agreed, and 38% were undecided. A total of 94% encountered ≥1 challenge counseling CGT patients, including adverse psychosocial events (76%), incorrect variant interpretation (68%), and unconfirmed results (69%); unconfirmed results were more common among oncology providers (p = 0.03). Providers reporting higher total challenge scores (p = 0.004) or more psychosocial or interpretation challenges (p ≤ 0.01) were more likely to indicate CGT harms outweigh benefits. Those with higher CGT clinical volume were more likely to indicate benefits outweigh harms (p = 0.003). Additional CGT challenges included patient understanding and communication of results, false negatives, incorrect testing/care, and financial costs; seven respondents (6%) documented positive outcomes.
Conclusion: Providers counseling CGT patients encounter psychosocial and medical challenges. Collaborations between regulators, CGT laboratories, providers, and consumers may help mitigate risks.
期刊介绍:
Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal for rapid dissemination of quality research related to the dynamically developing areas of human, molecular and medical genetics. The journal publishes original research articles covering findings in phenotypic, molecular, biological, and genomic aspects of genomic variation, inherited disorders and birth defects. The broad publishing spectrum of Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine includes rare and common disorders from diagnosis to treatment. Examples of appropriate articles include reports of novel disease genes, functional studies of genetic variants, in-depth genotype-phenotype studies, genomic analysis of inherited disorders, molecular diagnostic methods, medical bioinformatics, ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI), and approaches to clinical diagnosis. Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine provides a scientific home for next generation sequencing studies of rare and common disorders, which will make research in this fascinating area easily and rapidly accessible to the scientific community. This will serve as the basis for translating next generation sequencing studies into individualized diagnostics and therapeutics, for day-to-day medical care.
Molecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine publishes original research articles, reviews, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented.